Leasehold & Damp problems

[Fringer]

The whole thing of the insurance money has only just been mentioned this year. As far as I knew, the money we pay each month was going into a sink fund for any maintenance that needed doing which is why I've said that time and time again. It has never been explained that we were paying towards insurance

[andydd]

Doesn't need to be explained, it's in the lease, and it's what 99% of leaseholders do. You need to have a full understanding of the lease, it's the contract between you and fh and it binds you both.

[Fringer]

So really I've got no leg to stand on with making a claim through the small claims court then for compensation

[andydd]

Sorry..but you may need to breiefly explain the sitaution again,. the original post is quite complex. Youve confused the issue by mentioning insurance and management fees, but from what Ive read in your lease, they appear quite legitimate.

 

Remember, the lease is your contract, it obliges both you and the freeholder to perform certain actions. If anything is done by a management agent he is working on behalf of the freeholder so any legal action would be against him.

 

The lease obliges you to pay the ground rent and service charge and do certain repair actions to the interior (see Paragrpah 4 of Lease).

 

And the Freeholder must do the repairs under Paragraph 5 (1) if he doesnt then you do have a righjt for compensation/damages BUT you must have a fuill understanding of YOUR obligations and HIS obligations, they apply to different parts, basically..yours=interior and his =exterior.

 

Im not sure you have enough understanding of the issues and that your claim could fail/easily be defenmded, thats why I asked what it said, by that I meant EXACTLY but your answer was a bit vague.

 

It may of been possible to make an applicatio to the FTT (First Tier Tribunal) instaed of the county court (alough a Cc would often transfer it there anyway).

 

Now im not sure in your lease, but in some leases Freeholders can recover legals costs from you (even if they lose !), it is therefore important that you make an S20C application to the court saying something along the lines of "I make an application under S20C of the landlord and tenant act 1985 that any costs incurred are not to be taken as relevant costs and recovered as service charges" (See 20C here > http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1985/70)

[Fringer]

Sorry, there has been so much going on with it all I have jumped from one thing to another.

 

Basically I have made a claim to reimburse me for having to redecorate my sons bedroom for the 2nd time in a year after the contractors admitted they hadn't carried out the previous damp courses correctly.

 

I obviously have misunderstood the lease which is a sorry state to be in considering we have been here for 9 years today! We were told any money paid on the monthly basis was towards maintenance and of course as we have had hardly anything done in these 9 years I have questioned where this money has gone.

It is only now I am being told we are paying half towards the buildings insurance. That is really by the by now as I have paid out to have maintenance works to the exterior walls myself.

The landlords contractors quoted far more than what I paid so I'd rather do that from now on.

 

I didn't quote anything like u mentioned in ur last post. I literally stated what I have said to u, the contractors carried out damp courses which then admitted were not done correctly therefore i am claiming the redecoration costs.

I have paid £60 to make the claim which I'm now thinking is more money I've just thrown down the drain

[andydd]

No worries, I owned my property for about 10 years before looking at the lease and alas most are written in legalease that is not easy for the layperson to understand.

 

Remember though that I believe that the contractors were employed by the Freeholder so your claim would be against the FH, not the contractors.

 

Did you have to pay towards any of the cost of the works ? (I.e recouped via maintanence charge/service charge), if so, as I mentioned earlier you could of applied direct to FTT, they don't have juridstiction to decide damages/compensation BUT they do have the ability to discuss reasonableness, if the work was shoddy, expensive or not to high standard they can conclude you should only pay £xx amount or be refunded some if you have already paid.

 

You can also claim damages for having to live in a damp room for example, but this gets more complicated and its not really clear if the FH has been negligent or breached any covenants in the lease.

 

Now lastly be aware that you cant just withdraw a court claim and only lose the £60n fee, you could well be held laible for the other sides costs, this is why people must think carefully before starting court action.

[Fringer]

I haven't paid for any of the work his contractors carried out as the damp course was under guarantee.

 

I cant remember if I mentioned before but I contacted the ombudsman who stated the company are no longer a member of the scheme although still advertising that they were. They were going to contact them to get their advert removed.

 

All I want is thee money back for what I've paid out this time. I've had to decorate this room every year and never asked for a penny but now I've had enough

[Fringer]

I've had the Notice of Issue through saying that the landlord would have had his on the 1st December.

I've still not had a single response from him but today I had a call from the contractors who done the damp course asking me when they can come and do the pointing.

In my last email to the landlord I informed him I could get that done myself for less than half of what he had been quoted so not to go ahead with it.

He is obviously ignoring my requests completely.

[andydd]

"In my last email to the landlord I informed him I could get that done myself for less than half of what he had been quoted so not to go ahead with it."

 

This may be the case, but generally that's not how leasehold works, normally the LL would arrange and get the works done and recoup the money off the leaseholders, although there is the S20 Consultation process for costs above £250 and leaseholders have a chance to nominate their own contractor.

[Fringer]

After all the problems with his contractors though I'd rather they don't do any work here.

I've reported the LL to trading standards as he isn't part of any redress scheme. I've checked with them all.

 

Am I within my right to have work done myself or do I have to go through him? Even if I'm paying for the work to be carried out?

[andydd]

Hi.

 

Its not 100% clear whether internal damp problems are YOUR responsibility or the LL's, (generally inside such as painting walls would be yours and the outside and structure would be the landlords), damp internal walls could come under either but I suspect it would fall upon the landlord.

 

If it is the LL's responsibility then you don't really have much say over the contractor he uses, with the exception of if the cost is to be more than £250 per leaseholder than he MUST follow the S20 Consultation process, this gives you a chance to make comments, suggest alternative contractor, etc

 

As for doing the work yourself, generally the answer is no, this is because as leaseholder you only technically rent the building, the structure belongs to the landlord and its upto him to repair it and in theory than can sue for trespass if you start mucking up their property, however should a LL totally neglect his repair obligations it is possible to do works yourself.

 

As for the Redress Scheme, it is the managing agent who must be a member not the landlord although this creates an odd situation, what if the LL does the managing work himself ?>, I asked LEASE about this and they suggested he then doesn't have to belong to the redress scheme but this seems silly and an obvious loophole in the law.