Planning problem with common area - is management company responsible?

Casati

Hopefully this question does not go against any rules but in a situation where council find that all conditions of planning were not adhered to in a development, would the management company be responsible or would the original developer hold any responsibility? The developer has washed his hands of anything to do with the site once the management company was setup and all the houses were sold and Im guessing this is within his rights.

Related to this is how long after planning is granted can the council enact an enforcement notice if they want to for not complying with all conditions of planning. I have read on google its 7 years after planning grant, 7 years after expiry of planning and 5 years after expiry of planning so not I'm more confused. Appreciate if anybody is knowledgeable in this area?

Lenar3556

Casati wrote: »

Hopefully this question does not go against any rules but in a situation where council find that all conditions of planning were not adhered to in a development, would the management company be responsible or would the original developer hold any responsibility? The developer has washed his hands of anything to do with the site once the management company was setup and all the houses were sold and Im guessing this is within his rights.

Related to this is how long after planning is granted can the council enact an enforcement notice if they want to for not complying with all conditions of planning. I have read on google its 7 years after planning grant, 7 years after expiry of planning and 5 years after expiry of planning so not I'm more confused. Appreciate if anybody is knowledgeable in this area?

Potentially quite a few variables here. The best person to contact in the first instance would be the solicitor who acted for the owners managment company in the conveyance of the common areas to that entity.

Out of interest what is the nature of the alleged planning non compliance? When was the development constructed?

Casati

Lenar3556 wrote: »

Potentially quite a few variables here. The best person to contact in the first instance would be the solicitor who acted for the owners managment company in the conveyance of the common areas to that entity.

Out of interest what is the nature of the alleged planning non compliance? When was the development constructed?

A few non compliance issues e.g. Footpaths and road apparently not constructed in accordance with planning and shared area not landscaped. It was a ghost estate but all works that were completed were done circa 2010

Lenar3556

Casati wrote: »

A few non compliance issues e.g. Footpaths and road apparently not constructed in accordance with planning and shared area not landscaped. It was a ghost estate but all works that were completed were done circa 2010

Ok - is this a housing estate?
When you say managment company, is there a company limited by guarantee in existence? This would have directors and a secretary whom are in all probability property owners themselves......or are you talking about a less formal residents association type affair?

Who have the local authority approached over these issues?

Casati

Lenar3556 wrote: »

Ok - is this a housing estate?
When you say managment company, is there a company limited by guarantee in existence? This would have directors and a secretary whom are in all probability property owners themselves......or are you talking about a less formal residents association type affair?

Who have the local authority approached over these issues?

Its a LTD management company where the directors own houses in the estate. The management company owns the road and common area.

Council are telling the directors they must comply with original planning conditions for the common areas and are indicating that a formal enforcement notice will be taken against them if they don't. The council haven't contacted the developer

Any idea when the clock on the 7 year statue starts? Is it when the original work was completed by the develop, the date of planning or some other date?

Lenar3556

Casati wrote: »

Its a LTD management company where the directors own houses in the estate. The management company owns the road and common area.

Council are telling the directors they must comply with original planning conditions for the common areas and are indicating that a formal enforcement notice will be taken against them if they don't. The council haven't contacted the developer

Any idea when the clock on the 7 year statue starts? Is it when the original work was completed by the develop, the date of planning or some other date?

Again, the first port of call would be with the companies solicitor who acted for it at the point of transfer. The directors of that company should also arrange that the company take legal advice on its obligations and the best course of action.

Usually you would avoid transferring common areas from the developer into an OMC until everything was fully finished, but their may have been other considerations given the ‘ghost’ nature of the estate.

The local authority may have some difficulty in bringing enforcement proceedings at this stage, although their actions up to now would be relevant.

Would the OMC have much by way of resources to undertake works? How many houses are in the estate?

This could be a headache for further dealings in houses if it is not resolved.

markpb

Dublin CC did a survey of an apartment block estate I used to live in. They found numerous breaches of planning permission, mostly to do with the location of underground pipes and the types of manhole covers used. The estate was finished about a decade earlier. The council contacted the developer who ignored them. Then they tried to claim off the bond lodged by the developer at the time of construction but it had apparently lapsed. So they gave up. During the entire process, they never attempted to force the OMC to fix the issues.

Lenar3556

markpb wrote: »

Dublin CC did a survey of an apartment block estate I used to live in. They found numerous breaches of planning permission, mostly to do with the location of underground pipes and the types of manhole covers used. The estate was finished about a decade earlier. The council contacted the developer who ignored them. Then they tried to claim off the bond lodged by the developer at the time of construction but it had apparently lapsed. So they gave up. During the entire process, they never attempted to force the OMC to fix the issues.

I would question the strategy in pursuing an OMC in cases like these. They are by their nature often vulnerable entities and many’s a local authority would be delighted to see them operating successfully without chasing them for the shortcomings of a boomtime developer.

Casati

Lenar3556 wrote: »

I would question the strategy in pursuing an OMC in cases like these. They are by their nature often vulnerable entities and many’s a local authority would be delighted to see them operating successfully without chasing them for the shortcomings of a boomtime developer.

Based on their actions it seems they don’t care who they go after- is it likely the directors would have to pay to have works corrected or face criminal prosecution I wonder

Casati

Casati wrote: »

Based on their actions it seems they don’t care who they go after- is it likely the directors would have to pay to have works corrected or face criminal prosecution I wonder

Casati, you know that if you own your property, you are also part of the OMC, it’s not just the Directors. Any costs associated with the development will be shared amongst the OMC members.

JustAThought

Dav010 wrote: »

Casati, you know that if you own your property, you are also part of the OMC, it’s not just the Directors. Any costs associated with the development will be shared amongst the OMC members.

Compliance inspector with the local authority forst and cc to planning department head. Big money grtting things fixed and for
the council to have given the builder back
his bond theiremshould have been an inspectioon and aign-off. If this was not given back then that is exactly what the bond is there for - fixing unresolved problems - not for the council
to spend on monogramed envelopes and chainsaw sculptures. Start there with the bond and follow the money and precesses.

Lenar3556

Casati wrote: »

Based on their actions it seems they don’t care who they go after- is it likely the directors would have to pay to have works corrected or face criminal prosecution I wonder

Any action could only be taken against the company. The directors would not be personally liable. The company quite possibly would not have the resources to undertake works of this nature even if required to do so, and may need to approach the members (likely all property owners in the estate) for a contribution.

Perhaps the local authorities biggest stick is that an ongoing situation of this nature will significantly impact on the ability to buy and sell houses in the estate.

It may be possible to reach some compromise between the LA and the company/members. Raising the issue with local councillors may be helpful, but legal advice is now required in the first instance.

Lenar3556

JustAThought wrote: »

Compliance inspector with the local authority forst and cc to planning department head. Big money grtting things fixed and for
the council to have given the builder back
his bond theiremshould have been an inspectioon and aign-off. If this was not given back then that is exactly what the bond is there for - fixing unresolved problems - not for the council
to spend on monogramed envelopes and chainsaw sculptures. Start there with the bond and follow the money and precesses.

Many of the boomtime bonds were insurance bonds, some had expiries and others were qualified to such an extent that there were frankly of very little use to a local authority when things ultimately went wrong.

LA’s tend to be much stricter with the terms of bonds nowadays.

Casati

Casati wrote: »

Any idea when the clock on the 7 year statue starts? Is it when the original work was completed by the develop, the date of planning or some other date?

That begins once the governing permission has expired. So 12 years from the grant of permission.

Casati

Yakov P. Golyadkin wrote: »

That begins once the governing permission has expired. So 12 years from the grant of permission.

Okay that's interesting, I'd say the council are outside 12 years.

Think legal advise will be sought asap either way