Landlord won't pay management fee, management company changing the locks

MonaPizza · 11-07-2013 05:22PM #1

Here's an interesting one.
A colleague of mine is renting an apartment in Dublin from an apartment company. This apartment company own units in the building. The owner of the apartment company it seems has not been paying the management company for their services. In turn the management company is replacing the FOB access system at the front door and they have notified my colleague that they will not be providing FOB access to him.

So essentially his landlord hasn't paid the service costs so they're changing the communal lock and they notified him (my colleague) that this would happen in the next few days.
What's he supposed to do if he comes home from work tomorrow and can't get in? This is quite urgent and waiting around for the legal wheel to turn while he's living in his car in the carpark isn't really an option.

Thanks for any feedback.

gaius c · 11-07-2013 05:39PM

This is starting to become more and more common because insolvent landlords know that arrears in management fees will be a liability against whoever takes over the apartment, i.e. the bank when they repo.

Tell him to call the apartment company asap to outline the situation but I'd also call threshold www.threshold.ie for third party advice on what to do here because him being locked out of his apartment is a very real risk here.

Citycap · 11-07-2013 06:21PM

The apartment owner does not care about the situation as long as he is getting the rent in every month.
The tenant should make contact with him and inform him that he wont be paying the rent as he is not getting the service he expects.
If he wants to waste his time he can contact Threshold. Gobbleygook is all you get from them

Tigger · 11-07-2013 08:18PM

dont pay the rent pay the mgmt fees instead
keep receipts and everything in writing

the_syco · 11-07-2013 08:34PM

MonaPizza wrote: »

In turn the management company is replacing the FOB access system at the front door and they have notified my colleague that they will not be providing FOB access to him.

Tell your mate to get out whilst they can; I'd say the management company will just introduce more things to make people pay, such as clamping, etc. See if he can move out and get his deposit.

Paulw · 11-07-2013 10:56PM

Your friend needs to chase and hassle his landlord. Plain and simple.

It is up to the landlord to provide access to the unit for his tenant. It is also the legal responsibility of the landlord to pay his management fees.

StillWaters · 11-07-2013 11:27PM

Paulw wrote: »

Your friend needs to chase and hassle his landlord. Plain and simple.

It is up to the landlord to provide access to the unit for his tenant. It is also the legal responsibility of the landlord to pay his management fees.

I dont think this will work, the LL is in trouble and he won't or can't pay the fees. I'd go for Tiggers advice, and engage with the management company (if they will engage with a tenant).

Lantus · 11-07-2013 11:31PM

MonaPizza wrote: »

Here's an interesting one.
A colleague of mine is renting an apartment in Dublin from an apartment company. This apartment company own units in the building. The owner of the apartment company it seems has not been paying the management company for their services. In turn the management company is replacing the FOB access system at the front door and they have notified my colleague that they will not be providing FOB access to him.

So essentially his landlord hasn't paid the service costs so they're changing the communal lock and they notified him (my colleague) that this would happen in the next few days.
What's he supposed to do if he comes home from work tomorrow and can't get in? This is quite urgent and waiting around for the legal wheel to turn while he's living in his car in the carpark isn't really an option.

Thanks for any feedback.

I'm sympathetic to tenants in this situation but the company cannot run on fresh air. Insurance, lights, investment and looking after big buildings with lifts costs five if not six figure sums. Landlords renting and not paying service fees are essentially defrauding the company and the other residents by expecting everyone else to subsidise them. Unfortuantley the only way to hit them is in the pocket and that means hurting the tenant who is innocent.

Its a gap in the law and the MUD act needs to firm this up. In the mean time OMC's should start this process where they can. The landlords dont shed a tear when they cannot/do not pay, neither should the company. Take out the emotion and get the job done.

Xeyn · 11-07-2013 11:52PM

Whilst I agree with you generally, surely that's counterproductive. 'Hitting the landlord where it hurts' is all good and well but the company is not seeing that money and by taking money out of the ll's pocket they are further reducing the prospect of them seeing any more money.

Paulw · 12-07-2013 08:35AM

StillWaters wrote: »

I'd go for Tiggers advice, and engage with the management company (if they will engage with a tenant).

The management company have no contract/relationship with the tenant and have no responsibility there. They have a legal contract with the landlord though.

The tenant only has a contract with the landlord. The tenant should file a complaint with the PRTB, as well as chasing the landlord, until the problem is resolved. Either that, or start looking for somewhere else to live.

Ray Palmer · 12-07-2013 09:54AM

Tigger wrote: »

dont pay the rent pay the mgmt fees instead
keep receipts and everything in writing

I think this is actually something the tenant can do. There is a provision to pay for work if the LL fails to fix an issue. This would seem like a legitimate reason to pay the management fees from the rent.

djimi · 12-07-2013 09:58AM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

I think this is actually something the tenant can do. There is a provision to pay for work if the LL fails to fix an issue. This would seem like a legitimate reason to pay the management fees from the rent.

Do you not need to have the landlords consent before you can deduct from the rent to carry out work?

Not that it makes any real difference; if I was locked out of my apartment because the landlord wasnt paying their fees there is no way on earth I would be handing over another penny in rent one way or another anyway, so if the landlord has his head screwed on he would be well advised to accept one month without rent in order to make the problem go away rather than an indefinite period of time without rent as the tenant packs up and leaves and no other tenant can be found as nobody can get access to the property!

Ray Palmer · 12-07-2013 11:14AM

djimi wrote: »

Do you not need to have the landlords consent before you can deduct from the rent to carry out work?

Not that it makes any real difference; if I was locked out of my apartment because the landlord wasnt paying their fees there is no way on earth I would be handing over another penny in rent one way or another anyway, so if the landlord has his head screwed on he would be well advised to accept one month without rent in order to make the problem go away rather than an indefinite period of time without rent as the tenant packs up and leaves and no other tenant can be found as nobody can get access to the property!

I always thought you needed landlord consent but there is a clause that basically says you can deduct money to pay for the work if the LL is too slow.

Withholding rent is not legal.

It doesn't seem worth arguing about just do what is legal and reasonable.

Obviously if the management fees are years behind it isn't an issue that can be fixed through one or two months rent.

djimi · 12-07-2013 11:43AM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Obviously if the management fees are years behind it isn't an issue that can be fixed through one or two months rent.

True. I would see it more as a gesture from the tenant that might buy them some time to sort themselves out more so than anything. Chances are in the long run the only solution for the tenant is to move, as there is a good chance that this situation wont get sorted in a hurry, if at all.

Best solution really is to talk to the landlord and try and come up with a solution. The tenant paying the management company directly for a period of time might actually work out the best solution for the landlord in the long run; if access to the building is denied then no further rent will be forthcoming from the tenant either way and there will be no prospect of replacing the tenant, so realistically the landlord is going to be without the rent money for a number of months one way or another either way.

TheBandicoot · 12-07-2013 01:57PM

What it be worth it for a prospective tenant to demand a clause be inserted into the lease that requires the landlord to provide evidence that he has paid all management fees applicable for the duration of the lease term? Landlords ask for evidence of income, employment etc to ensure the tenant can afford the rent, so it would be only fair to allow the tenant to not have to trust in the word of the landlord on this issue.

djimi · 12-07-2013 02:03PM

TheBandicoot wrote: »

What it be worth it for a prospective tenant to demand a clause be inserted into the lease that requires the landlord to provide evidence that he has paid all management fees applicable for the duration of the lease term? Landlords ask for evidence of income, employment etc to ensure the tenant can afford the rent, so it would be only fair to allow the tenant to not have to trust in the word of the landlord on this issue.

To be honest I can see this becoming something that may happen in the not too distant future. This kind of story is becoming all too common, with landlords either unable or unwilling to keep up with management fee payments and tenants facing the brunt of the consequences.

Ideally the law needs to be changed to prevent management companies taking measures such as this against tenants. I understand the difficulty for management companies, but it is not right that someone should be made to suffer when they have absolutely no involvement, and in most cases no knowledge, of the dispute.

Chris_5339762 · 12-07-2013 02:04PM

It would be great, but in reality a dodgy landlord would tell that prospective tenant to take a hike. He'll then just take the first person who doesn't want the clause.

djimi · 12-07-2013 02:20PM

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

It would be great, but in reality a dodgy landlord would tell that prospective tenant to take a hike. He'll then just take the first person who doesn't want the clause.

Thats fine, but at least its a decent warning sign to tenants to steer clear of the kind of arsehole landlord who would let the tenant get locked out of the building or have their car clamped.

dissed doc · 12-07-2013 02:36PM

It's completely unreasonable and to make your life easier I suggest looking for somewhere else. Nothing will happen fast legally and if the fobs the cancelled, they only be reactivated if the arrears are paid off. If they are actually threatening to stop it, then there must be a lot of arrears - for example, still unpaid for 2012 or 2011.

Paulw · 12-07-2013 03:12PM

djimi wrote: »

Ideally the law needs to be changed to prevent management companies taking measures such as this against tenants.

But, the management company are not taking action against the tenant. They are taking action against the landlord, by removing access due to the lack of payment.

It is an unfortunate consequence that the tenant is effected. Any potential tenant renting a premises should ask if management fees are paid, so that such an issue would be limited.

Ultimately, it is between tenant and landlord, and landlord and management company.

djimi · 12-07-2013 03:29PM

Paulw wrote: »

But, the management company are not taking action against the tenant. They are taking action against the landlord, by removing access due to the lack of payment.

It is an unfortunate consequence that the tenant is effected. Any potential tenant renting a premises should ask if management fees are paid, so that such an issue would be limited.

Ultimately, it is between tenant and landlord, and landlord and management company.

And its this unfortunate consequence that needs to be legislated against. Asking for a record of accounts is fine at the start of a tenancy, but just because a landlord is up to date now doesnt mean that they will continue to pay.

I understand the position that management company are in, but its not the fault of the tenant that their landlord cant/wont pay their fees, and its not right that the tenant is the one who ends up punished. How would you feel if you came back to find your car clamped in a supermarket carpark because the developer fell behind on their payments to the bank? Its not too different a situation.

Paulw · 12-07-2013 03:38PM

djimi wrote: »

I understand the position that management company are in, but its not the fault of the tenant that their landlord cant/wont pay their fees, and its not right that the tenant is the one who ends up punished. How would you feel if you came back to find your car clamped in a supermarket carpark because the developer fell behind on their payments to the bank? Its not too different a situation.

No, it's not the fault of the tenant at all. But, the management company very seldom withdraw services or introduce clamping, without proper notification. This gives the tenant time to chase the landlord over the issues.

The landlord is making income from renting out the property. The landlord has a legal obligation to pay his management fees. Non payment of fees means that services can be removed.

In most developments that I know of, the people with the largest outstanding management fees tend to be landlords. They do this because they are making money from renting out the property, but don't want to pay for the services that the tenant uses. Do most build in the cost of management fees to their rent? Damn right they do, but yet they want that as extra profit.

While I have sympathy for the tenant, I fully support the action of the management company.

Not being able to access the unit means that the landlord won't make any money from the property, until such time as management fees are paid in full.

dermot_sheehan · 12-07-2013 07:11PM

There has been legislation on the books since the 19th century governing this:

section 1 Landlord and Tenant Ireland (Amendment) Act 1860

The word "rent" shall include any sum or return in the nature of rent, payable
or given by way of compensation for the holding of any lands:

section 21
Sub-tenant may voluntarily pay rent to landlord.

21. Where any tenant subletting shall neglect to pay his landlord the rent
payable in respect of the lands comprised in the lease, it shall be lawful for
the sub-tenant, after and often as any one gale of such rent shall have
accrued due and remain unpaid to such landlord, and before any action brought
by such tenant against the sub-tenant, voluntarily to make payment of so much
of the rent due by such sub-tenant to such tenant as may be sufficient to
discharge such gale or gales; and the receipt of the landlord or his agent
shall be a full discharge to the sub-tenant against the tenant in respect of
all rent so paid.

An individual renting an apartment is a sub-tenant, since the owner of the apartment holds the apartment by virtue of a long lease.

The issue is whether a management service charge can be considered "rent" under the 1860 act.

Landlord won't pay management fee, management company changing the locks

Comments