NW5 leaseholder

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Service Charge – Supporting Docs & Management Audit #5616
    NW5 leaseholder
    Participant

    This is really helpful information, thank you for sharing. I would be happy to contribute to a cloud-funding arrangement if it helps to facilitate a thorough independent audit. That said, I’m perplexed why it should be the responsibility of the ‘customer’ to make these arrangements.

    Does this ongoing situation not suggest a lack of robust financial governance and oversight within the Leaseholder Services team, and why is someone not being held accountable and responsible for this at Camden? If there is a systemic problem with providing a reliable and accurate invoicing system than surely Camden should be funding external auditors to help them identity and correct these accounting and invoicing problems. It is very concerning that Camden are sending out invoices to leaseholders knowing they are ‘likely’ to the incorrect. I can’t think of any other organisation/industry where this type of practice would be deemed acceptable.

    in reply to: Spring Clean programme (recharge to leaseholders) #5340
    NW5 leaseholder
    Participant

    Thank you Leighton Grove, that is very helpful advice and insight. A few of my fellow leaseholders want to sign a petition about the estimate charge for the works but I’ve suggested we hold off until the final bill comes in. I’m not sure if there’s any benefit in taking this further until Camden are in receipt of the final costs for our estate.

    in reply to: Fire doors (Updating old glass front doors) #4177
    NW5 leaseholder
    Participant

    Thanks Paul,

    Much appreciate you’re ongoing contributions to the site- always helpful and informative.

    in reply to: Major works bill from 2011 #4127
    NW5 leaseholder
    Participant

    Hi,

    I’m from the Cressfeild estate in Kentish Town and we received a similar bill this week as well. We bought our flat in 2014 and were invoiced for the same work that was undertaken in 2011. I contacted Leaseholder Services this week and received the following advice:
    1. Legally Camden are able to recharge leaseholders up to a maximum of six years from the works completion date
    2. Contact the Solicitor who conducted the conveyancing on our behalf since they should have held back a ‘retention amount’ to cover the charge if a section 20 had been issued. I contacted our solicitor and awaiting their response.

    Hope that’s helpful

    Thanks

    in reply to: Incorrect billing for costly repair jobs #4011
    NW5 leaseholder
    Participant

    Sorry to hear you’ve had problems with incorrect billing. You would think Camden would have robust auditing processes in place to ensure this doesn’t occur! Clearly, the financial consequences are huge for leaseholders.

    Just a query though, we recently purchased a one bedroom flat as a leaseholder and we have a leak from our neighbour’s balcony upstairs as well. I’m very interested to know why leaseholders are responsible for covering the costs associated with repairs to the ‘external’ structure of the building?? I thought we were only responsible for internal repairs? Why is the freeholder (i.e. Camden Council) not responsible for these repair charges?

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)