Mgt Co. imposes clamping to collect debt

Hungrycol

Greendoor Management company in my area have imposed car parking sanctions including clamping company and parking permits that are only provided on payment of annual subs. I pay my annual subs but I have also experienced clamping in car parks for residential areas and it's a constant headache for residents, visitors, family, service workers, carers, etc.

I'm really annoyed by this, been living there for 14 years without any parking problem and now I'm shafted those that don't pay their annual subs. I have also heard it devalues the area.

Is this normal?

Michael D Not Higgins

Yes it's normal.

Dial Hard

Hungrycol wrote: »

I'm really annoyed by this, been living there for 14 years without any parking problem and now I'm shafted those that don't pay their annual subs.

How are you being shafted? You pay your management fees so you'll get a permit, no?

Kyta

Just 1 of the hazards of living in managed property in my opinion.

Hungrycol

So it's normal for a management company to impose whatever they want regardless of the consequences to homeowners?

Dial Hard

Hungrycol wrote: »

So it's normal for a management company to impose whatever they want regardless of the consequences to homeowners?

You do realise the management company is the homeowners, right?

Michael D Not Higgins

Hungrycol wrote: »

So it's normal for a management company to impose whatever they want regardless of the consequences to homeowners?

The homeowners are the management company. The agent is appointed by the homeowners to manage the day-to-day and the homeowners have AGMs where they vote on measures such as these. In other words, the agent didn't just decide to bring in permits and clamping, they were instructed to do so by you and your neighbours.

Hungrycol

Dial Hard wrote: »

How are you being shafted? You pay your management fees so you'll get a permit, no?

My mother lives in a block where clamping was imposed and now she can't have more than one visitor at any one time, meaning her family or friends can't visit her all at once. In her experience they are a pain for the residents.

I'm more peeed off that Greendoor used this to collect their dept instead of pursuing the defaulters.

Hungrycol

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

The homeowners are the management company. The agent is appointed by the homeowners to manage the day-to-day and the homeowners have AGMs where they vote on measures such as these. In other words, the agent didn't just decide to bring in permits and clamping, they were instructed to do so by you and your neighbours.

I couldn't attend the AGM when this was voted through. So this is a case of tough-sh!t?

Michael D Not Higgins

Hungrycol wrote: »

My mother lives in a block where clamping was imposed and not she can't have more than one visitor at any one time, meaning her family or friends can't visit her all at once. In her experience they are a pain for the residents.

I'm more peeed off that Greendoor used this to collect their dept instead of pursuing the defaulters.

It's not their debt, it's the owners management company's debt which is the company made up by you and your neighbours. The agents are only appointed to carry out the remit given to them by the OMC.

amcalester

Hungrycol wrote: »

My mother lives in a block where clamping was imposed and now she can't have more than one visitor at any one time, meaning her family or friends can't visit her all at once. In her experience they are a pain for the residents.

I'm more peeed off that Greendoor used this to collect their dept instead of pursuing the defaulters.

Greendoor would have proposed this method but it is the owners who voted for it.

Greendoor work for you and the other owners.

Hungrycol

amcalester wrote: »

Greendoor would have proposed this method but it is the owners who voted for it.

Greendoor work for you and the other owners.

I need to hold of the minutes of the last AGM so.

Michael D Not Higgins

Hungrycol wrote: »

I couldn't attend the AGM when this was voted through. So this is a case of tough-sh!t?

Would your vote have swayed the result? It's unlikely. Your neighbours who attended the AGM voted for this.

amcalester

Hungrycol wrote: »

I need to hold of the minutes of the last AGM so.

Yeah, check that proper procedures were followed. Were there enough people in attendance to hold a binding vote on the matter etc

Doop

Hungrycol wrote: »

I need to hold of the minutes of the last AGM so.

And the MUD Act 2011

happyfriday74

This is quite normal.

Its nearly standard practice for a management agent to only hand out permits to those who have paid up to date or are on an agreed payment plan/standing order.

hawkelady

Hungrycol wrote: »

Dial Hard wrote: »

How are you being shafted? You pay your management fees so you'll get a permit, no?

My mother lives in a block where clamping was imposed and now she can't have more than one visitor at any one time, meaning her family or friends can't visit her all at once. In her experience they are a pain for the residents.

I'm more peeed off that Greendoor used this to collect their dept instead of pursuing the defaulters.

There would be a text service that you text in your reg and it would save you getting clamped so your mother can have everyone over st once if she wanted.
Why are you bothered about this unless you haven't paid your subs ?

Caranica

It's not necessarily permanent. We're considering bringing it in to our development to deal with a mounting debt issue. If we do it will be short term.

It's not an easy option and would be way down the list of ways to collect fees. In our case it will be the last resort. Instead of being angry at the introduction of permit parking, be angry at your neighbours and fellow owners who are reneging on their legal contracts where they agreed to pay their management fees.

SteM

hawkelady wrote: »

There would be a text service that you text in your reg and it would save you getting clamped so your mother can have everyone over st once if she wanted.

Every complex handles things differently so you can't say this for sure.

loyatemu

it's very difficult for Mgmt companies to pursue deadbeat owners - taking legal action is expensive and lengthy. They often choose parking regulations as a way of annoying the non-payers into paying up. If you have a better idea, go to the next AGM and propose it.

Hasmunch

Hungrycol wrote: »

I'm really annoyed by this, been living there for 14 years without any parking problem and now I'm shafted those that don't pay their annual subs.

You were being shafted before anyway as they weren't paying their subs.

Hungrycol

loyatemu wrote: »

it's very difficult for Mgmt companies to pursue deadbeat owners - taking legal action is expensive and lengthy. They often choose parking regulations as a way of annoying the non-payers into paying up. If you have a better idea, go to the next AGM and propose it.

Why can't they sell the debt to debt collectors? It might encourage compliance next time.

amcalester

Hungrycol wrote: »

Why can't they sell the debt to debt collectors? It might encourage compliance next time.

Why would they sell the debt for cents on the Euro when they (and by they I mean you) could get the full amount by other means?

Hungrycol

Hungrycol wrote: »

My mother lives in a block where clamping was imposed and now she can't have more than one visitor at any one time, meaning her family or friends can't visit her all at once. In her experience they are a pain for the residents.

I'm more peeed off that Greendoor used this to collect their dept instead of pursuing the defaulters.

Sounds great, neighbours of mine hog one visitor space 100% of the time (they have a designated space themselves) and when they have visitors another 1 or 2 visitor spaces are taken up. There's 1 visitor space for every 4 apartments where I am.

If you want to cater for multiple visitors who have cars than live somewhere that facilitates that.

Hungrycol

amcalester wrote: »

Why would they sell the debt for cents on the Euro when they (and by they I mean you) could get the full amount by other means?

Cos at the moment they're getting nothing. Clamping pisses off everyone. The landlords, of which there are many, couldn't give a feck if their tenants get clamped. Just tells them to park somewhere else.

Graham

Hungrycol wrote: »

Cos at the moment they're getting nothing. Clamping pisses off everyone. The landlords, of which there are many, couldn't give a feck if their tenants get clamped. Just tells them to park somewhere else.

Most people would be fairly unhappy if their service charges increased to cover the written-off amounts.

They probably already have increased but at least your owners management company stands a good prospect of recouping the losses at whatever point in the future the errant owners properties are sold.

TSQ

Hungrycol wrote: »

Why can't they sell the debt to debt collectors? It might encourage compliance next time.

Why would you sell the debt? You engage a firm of solicitors who specialise in debt collection. All costs associated with collection of the debt fall on the debtor. If the debt is unpaid the case goes to court. In our development, once the case is listed for hearing the debtor pays up, and we never settle for less than the full amount owed (including collection charges). We have never actually had to take anyone to court, the threat has been enough, but if the owner didn't pay up a lien would be put on the apartment - or other property owned by the debtor - which could be sold to collect the debt. You could be waiting a long time for the money in this case, I know, if it is an owner-occupier, but it would be a very tiny percentage of owners who would allow it to get this far. We put a payment plan in place to pay off the arrears if reasonable and if the owner plays ball.

Also, when setting fees in our complex, we set a high fee and give a big discount to those who pay on time. This encourages owners to pay up when asked and means that the messers pay more - usually the same one or two idiots year after year as it happens.

Lantus

Hungrycol wrote:

I'm really annoyed by this, been living there for 14 years without any parking problem and now I'm shafted those that don't pay their annual subs. I have also heard it devalues the area.

If your omc don't get fees then services are not paid for. Insurance, maintenance, lifts etc. Non payers will be happy to not pay without consequence. The problem will is yours as with every owner.

Clamping is undesirable but economic and effective in getting people on a plan to pay to avoid future problems.

Owners can opt to remove when they reach say 95% or whatever payment overall.

Court handles the rest but it's an expensive route. Solicitors letters and a court date may be 300 euro which the omc needs to pay. Good for hardened offenders but a wise omc takes alternate routes to fee income.

TSQ

Lantus wrote: »

Court handles the rest but it's an expensive route. Solicitors letters and a court date may be 300 euro which the omc needs to pay. Good for hardened offenders but a wise omc takes alternate routes to fee income.

Any fees associated with pursuing the debt, from the first solicitors letter up to a full on court case (which we have never had to undertake, as we have always got paid in the end) fall on the debtor. The OMC may have to pay the solicitor's fees but will always (in our experience) recoup this money in the end from the debtor. If you play hardball a couple of times - and make it known - most people catch on in the end.

antoinolachtnai

You could be legally right; the OMC might have no right to do this. If you want to fight this it will cost a lot of money.

It would make a lot more sense for non-payers to pay. They will have to pay in the end anyway.

Nothing devalues property like badly maintained common areas.

pauliebdub

There was a attempt to impose clamping in my estate a while back, pushed through on the sly at a poorly attended agm. There was uproar over it, very few people actually wanted it and an emergency agm was called and it was reversed.

hawkelady

Do some scrupulous mgmt companies still try and fine residents for noise/ hanging washing on balconies still or was that ridiculous idea only played out during the boom ??

Caranica

hawkelady wrote: »

Do some scrupulous mgmt companies still try and fine residents for noise/ hanging washing on balconies still or was that ridiculous idea only played out during the boom ??

Penalties for breach of contract do exist. People signed legal contracts, they are responsible for complying with same.

hawkelady

Caranica wrote: »

hawkelady wrote: »

Do some scrupulous mgmt companies still try and fine residents for noise/ hanging washing on balconies still or was that ridiculous idea only played out during the boom ??

Penalties for breach of contract do exist. People signed legal contracts, they are responsible for complying with same.

You're wrong. Only guards and courts can issue monetary fines.
I was issued with a fine because a tenant of mine had a late night party before. I got my solicitor onto it and I had a written letter of apology within 3 days from the mgmt company . My solicitor issued them with legal proceedings if they ever issued a " fine " again ! That and the fact there hasn't been one recorded court case of a mgmt company taking a case should tell you that no homeowner should pay a fine to a mgmt company. I can see them introducing parking permits etc but they have no entitlement to issue a monetary fine for any rule they may have.

Caranica

hawkelady wrote: »

You're wrong. Only guards and courts can issue monetary fines.
I was issued with a fine because a tenant of mine had a late night party before. I got my solicitor onto it and I had a written letter of apology within 3 days from the mgmt company . My solicitor issued them with legal proceedings if they ever issued a " fine " again ! That and the fact there hasn't been one recorded court case of a mgmt company taking a case should tell you that no homeowner should pay a fine to a mgmt company. I can see them introducing parking permits etc but they have no entitlement to issue a monetary fine for any rule they may have.

That's why I said financial penalty

JustAThought

pauliebdub wrote: »

There was a attempt to impose clamping in my estate a while back, pushed through on the sly at a poorly attended agm. There was uproar over it, very few people actually wanted it and an emergency agm was called and it was reversed.

Yes - I know of another where something like this also happened -and it was also EGM'd and stopped by the owners. These so called management agencies often the original builder or their family screwing people with an annual tax on overpriced houses that they have already been paid for while sitting on their hairy arses in offices for other companies not delivering ANY further services and unable to provide any evidence of any service being done yet rewarding themselves or their wives or children with 80 and 90k salaries from 'management fees' and bringing in clamping when homeowners who have been sweeping common areas and cleaning play areas and cutting grass for.years refuse to pay anymore. This needs to become an election issue. In the meantime politicians and some county councils are still giving planning permisssion for no cars or half a f*ing space per house -or 3 or 4 bed houses in the suburbs on next zero public transport to where jobs are -delusional. No wonder people are stressed out and suicide rates at an all time high.

Mike3549

JustAThought wrote: »

Yes - I know of another where something like this also happened -and it was also EGM'd and stopped by the owners. These so called management agencies often the original builder or their family screwing people with an annual tax on overpriced houses that they have already been paid for while sitting on their hairy arses in offices for other companies not delivering ANY further services and unable to provide any evidence of any service being done yet rewarding themselves or their wives or children with 80 and 90k salaries from 'management fees' and bringing in clamping when homeowners who have been sweeping common areas and cleaning play areas and cutting grass for.years refuse to pay anymore. This needs to become an election issue. In the meantime politicians and some county councils are still giving planning permisssion for no cars or half a f*ing space per house -or 3 or 4 bed houses in the suburbs on next zero public transport to where jobs are -delusional. No wonder people are stressed out and suicide rates at an all time high.

That was about 10 years ago, everythings changed since then. Google MUD act 2011

daheff

Does your contract of purchase permit the mgmt company to issue parking permits /impose clamping?

when you bought the property did it come with X number of parking spots? If it did, imposing clamping would be a breach of that contract and would allow you to sue the mgmt co for interferring with your right to access your parking spot.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Mike3549

Ah come on, YOU are the management company, you sue mngm co, you sue yourself. If you stop paying mngm fees, YOU are the one who breaks the contract. We have 1.5 parking space according to our lease. If you stop paying, you lose your permission to park. Simples. If you are not happy how people vote at AGM, well you should move your ass and go to next one.
We had clampers in our estate. It was in terrible financial situation due non payers. I had no problems with clampers cos all my fees were up to date.
A couple years later we got rid of them, cos people started to pay their fees.

hawkelady

Mike3549 wrote: »

Ah come on, YOU are the management company, you sue mngm co, you sue yourself. If you stop paying mngm fees, YOU are the one who breaks the contract. We have 1.5 parking space according to our lease. If you stop paying, you lose your permission to park. Simples. If you are not happy how people vote at AGM, well you should move your ass and go to next one.
We had clampers in our estate. It was in terrible financial situation due non payers. I had no problems with clampers cos all my fees were up to date.
A couple years later we got rid of them, cos people started to pay their fees.

1.5 parking spaces ! Christ almighty. Btw, is your .5 of a car petrol or diesel ??

Mike3549

hawkelady wrote: »

1.5 parking spaces ! Christ almighty. Btw, is your .5 of a car petrol or diesel ??

Yes 1.5, 300 units, 450 parking spaces.
Thats 1.5 each.

Lantus

hawkelady wrote:

1.5 parking spaces ! Christ almighty. Btw, is your .5 of a car petrol or diesel ??

Very common way to allocate spaces when designing blocks. Not ideal, but common.

daheff

Mike3549 wrote: »

Ah come on, YOU are the management company, you sue mngm co, you sue yourself.

No...you sue the mgmt company. While you may have a share of ownership, you are not the 100% owner, so any legal costs would go against others too.

lawred2

Hungrycol wrote: »

I couldn't attend the AGM when this was voted through. So this is a case of tough-sh!t?

yes

Annasopra

Hungrycol wrote: »

Greendoor Management company in my area have imposed car parking sanctions including clamping company and parking permits that are only provided on payment of annual subs. I pay my annual subs but I have also experienced clamping in car parks for residential areas and it's a constant headache for residents, visitors, family, service workers, carers, etc.

I'm really annoyed by this, been living there for 14 years without any parking problem and now I'm shafted those that don't pay their annual subs. I have also heard it devalues the area.

Is this normal?

You are being shafted by people not paying management fees

Annasopra

Hungrycol wrote: »

I couldn't attend the AGM when this was voted through. So this is a case of tough-sh!t?

No
Come up with a plan for some viable alternatives on making people pay fees. Persuade your neighbours who agree with you to attend the next agm. Put a good case forward at AGM to drop clamping.

padd b1975

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

No
Come up with a plan for some viable alternatives on making people pay fees. Persuade your neighbours who agree with you to attend the next agm. Put a good case forward at AGM to drop clamping.

In my block you have to ring a phone number to open the gates.
If you're behind with your fees and not engaging with Management your access is denied by this method and you have to ring the 24hr management for access.
It's a minor inconvenience but it seems to work as the arrears numbers on the yearly statement have gone way down.

markpb

hawkelady wrote: »

You're wrong. Only guards and courts can issue monetary fines.

There are plenty of legal ways around that. The M50 toll operator charge a processing fee for sending you a letter telling you that your toll payment is overdue. Likewise, Section 23.11 of the MUD Act can be helpful for dealing with reticent owners.

Where a person, who by reason of subsection (1) is obliged to comply with house rules, commits a material breach of such rules, the owners’ management company of the development concerned may recover the reasonable costs of remedying such breach from such person which costs may be recovered as a simple contract debt in a court of competent jurisdiction.

Hungrycol

This is very much a debt collection method and not a parking problem fix although with it being a houses and apartments complex there is a parking problem around the apartments, but not around the houses. I understand that it can't be imposed on part of the estate as this will push the problem to the houses and so on.

After a long and rational conversation with the management co. this week it was agreed that this was the last ditch attempt at getting contracted mgt fees from the owners. I have been assured that this will in no way inconvenience those that currently are paid up or in an agreed payment plan. Many examples (no names) of the volume of debt that owners simple won't pay and don't care "sure you'll get the money if I sell my house". Next AGM is in December and I will definitely be there, I did highlight that the AGM agenda should be on the AGM notice that is sent around which will help with attendance. The attendance at the last one is less that 5% of the units under the Mgt co for our area.

I will be keeping a close eye on this and review it. I'm still skeptical that this is an effective collection mechanism and still think, given the current rental crisis, that landlords won't give a toss where their tenants park. Time will tell.

Hungrycol

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

No
Come up with a plan for some viable alternatives on making people pay fees. Persuade your neighbours who agree with you to attend the next agm. Put a good case forward at AGM to drop clamping.

Thanks, this thread is helpful of advice on alternatives.