Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I’m no lawyer! Perhaps speak to Leasehold Advisory Service and then report back here? (for the benefit of me, and everyone else!)
http://www.lease-advice.org/contact/ for the contact details.Peter Wright, chair of the Leaseholders’ Forum is very much of the opinion that you can state/observe (demand??) that they need to revisit the options appraisal, since the current figures base no resemblance to the original proposals (therefore invalidating the exercise) especially as it appears, from what you say, that the work has not yet started on your area.
I’m not sure, being honest, whether anyone has tried that tack with Camden; do feel free to give it a go and contact me/us here, letting us know how it goes. As this is a pan-borough issue, if it gets refused out of hand, I’m happy to escalate it via the Leaseholders’ Forum to see if that would have any more success (no guarantees!).
Best regards, Paul, Leaseholders’ Forum member.
My view is absolutely, this does allow for individual systems, using the council gas network and the former head of housing, Julian Fulbrook, agreed with this viewpoint. The Leaseholders’ Forum spent some time emphasising our point of view to him and other officers which is, I feel, a significant part of the reason that council policy on this issue changed for the better. That said, it doesn’t appear to have stopped the Major Works department recommending communal central heating and never recommending individual boilers (as far as I am aware) – the battle to change attitudes continues!
Sorry if the guide is not clear – I’ll have a poke around and see if I can improve the language. Opt out is on the basis that it is practical and reasonable. For many large estates this not be possible for infrastructure reasons but what IS possible, it binning the whole proposed scheme and going for something that all (ok, the majority of) tenants and leaseholders are happy with.
To put it another way, an estate can opt out of communal central heating and opt for individual boilers. This would depend on infrastructure, but given the proposed costs of some of the schemes, even paying for that infrastructure is worthy of detailed consideration.
The Forum has now (just!) got a copy of the latest Heating Optional Appraisal and this clearly states that individual boilers should be considered: http://democracy.camden.gov.uk/documents/b16759/Appendix%20A%2028th-Jul-2015%2018.45%20Leaseholders%20Forum.pdf?T=9 / “Replacement of inefficient systems with individual or communal heating whichever provides best overall value for money and secures the required carbon emission reductions” to be considered.
Cheers for posting Ross. The Leaseholders’ Forum has discussed this with Ross and other parties and know it is already affected Ainsworth Estate, Dobson Close and Hillgrove estates, but – as ever – the more leaseholders act together, the better the pool of resources for getting a sensible outcome (whatever that may look like!).
Hi Caz,
I’m not going to recommend either way – you’ll have to make up your own mind 🙂
On a technical point, your service charge letters won’t have mentioned this, this counts as “major works” and would have been sent separately from any other paperwork.
You may well have a case, but I can’t guarantee it; in one instance I thought I hadn’t had a notice and didn’t realise that I had – I only discovered when looking through my paperwork files more closely. I’ve mentioned to Mike Edmunds who runs Leaseholder Services that the some letters are often a bit torturous to read but he says he is legally bound in most instances; the Leaseholders’ Forum are nudging him to find workarounds!
More specifically, you won’t have received things about “on going work” or a date for when you would be billed, just some form of very official notice saying that the work and/or finances for the work had not been completed yet, at least once every 18 months since the work started.
Perhaps phone up Leaseholder Services and discuss the situation with them, referencing Section 20B? There is also the complaints process should you encounter any difficulties. We’ve produced a guide about the complaints process here https://www.leaseholdersforum.org.uk/guides/ and there is plenty of stuff about Section 20B on the internet.
My personal experience says give Camden Repairs a call and they’ll tell you whether they think this is a job for them or not; best dealt with on the phone however rather than online as it’s a complex query – you get a response immediately and also can organise for the plumber to come round at a time that suits you (if Camden are willing to investigate further). If they say it’s a job for them problem solved and stress removed.
If they say that it’s not, then you can investigate the options. As it’s the main stopcock I’m guessing that you could have an argument either way. A *draft* edition of the current leaseholders repairs guide that is being worked on says: “Pipe work that relates solely to the property such as a leaking waste pipe, trap etc.” is the leaseholder’s responsibility; I would say that as the stopcock relates to/separates from the communal infrastructure then it’s a job for Camden. Only one way to find out – and Camden will have had this query before so it won’t be anything new for them.
Paul
Hi Caz,
Unfortunately that’s not right… this link might help you: http://www.lease-advice.org/lvtissues/print_issues.asp?section=1
In particular: “When are service charge costs “incurred”?” (it says service charges but I believe it is also applicable to Major Works): “Section 20B Landlord and Tenant Act 1985: service charges must be demanded within 18 months from when the costs were incurred unless the landlord notifies you they will be demanded at a later date.”
If you haven’t received the Section 20B notice then you may not have to pay (I’m no lawyer!), but if you have been regularly receiving Section 20B notices – at least once every 18 months – about the bill for the major works on your TV aerial not having been finalised, then it looks like you will have to pay… unless anyone knows better of course! 🙂
More details about Section 20B notices here: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1985/70/section/20B
Paul
Just to confirm that I’ll send you his details 🙂
We’ve got a guide about major works here: https://www.leaseholdersforum.org.uk/guides/heating-options
Really it depends on what they are doing – it may be value for money, or it may not. I can’t claim that recent consultation exercises that I have heard about have impressed me much to be honest, but that just means that leaseholders have to fight harder for the their rights to be respected.
There is a Ludham & Waxham Leaseholders Association – do you want me to pass your details on to them. That particular association isn’t currently showing up on the Camden’s website, so I’ll flag that up to the Chair of the association as I know him.
Kind regards, Paul
This isn’t an entirely fair question 🙂 I’m just one leaseholder; with my own particular circumstances. When I bought my property I knew the works were in full swing; on this occasion, yes I’ll be paying up.
Yep, have to agree there James 🙂 Especially as my TV aerial was working with Freeview absolutely fine; onwards to the next battle though!
Hi there,
My understanding is this: Camden separates out work as both “estates” (work affecting the entire area) and “blocks” (works just affecting your building). Pavement or central boiler works are therefore estate costs as they benefit everyone, whereas the concrete repair works that we have recently had carried out here will be charged on a “per block” basis. For another example, lifts are always charged to a whole block regardless of whether the ground floor uses it or not (and this methodology is often specified in the lease).
At a guess you need to ask Camden how they define your estate and whether they have done this so consistently over the years? It could be that at some points your building has been subsidised by the other building, and at other times vice versa. Often Camden, I suspect, would claim that treating both buildings together makes for more efficient management (and therefore costs).
To further understand the methodology behind the breakdown do contact Leaseholder Services and they should actually get back to you with an answer.
Paul
(Leaseholders’ Forum member)Hi Gossjam,
The details of the complaints process are here: https://www.leaseholdersforum.org.uk/guides/complaining-effectively/
At Kiln Place estate, I’ve found that the final charges are broadly similar to the recent estimates (somewhere around the £150 mark), so I don’t know what happened in your case.
Ultimately, if you don’t think that the bill represents fair value then that is for the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) to decide (they used to be known as the LVT). That said, you can certainly ask Leaseholder Services for a breakdown of the charges and it doesn’t hurt to ask.
For what it’s worth, the Major Works department is currently in the process of tendering for more suppliers (which the Leaseholders’ Forum has lobbied them for for many years; and worked with Camden Council to get them to this stage), rather than relying on their current two; hopefully this will bring down prices for new works, but sadly doesn’t affect work already underway or completed.
Paul
(Leaseholders’ Forum member)Hi Mumtaz. This doesn’t directly answer you question, but just to confirm that this is a bill for work already done (so it’s for the aerial you are already using). Whether £250 represents value for money or not is a different matter!