# Builder is still my Management Co that does nothing



## rippedoff (21 Jun 2006)

Hi folks,

Sorry if this is in the wrong thread. I live in a small (12 units) apartment complex in south co Dublin. I bought it about 4 years ago.

They are large apts built in 1980 and are populated mostly by elderly people who would'nt be that proactive on the management company side of things ie maintence etc...

The management company are actually the builders who built the apts in 1980s!!! Is this dodgey???

They never seem to upkeep the place, and if they do come looking for money to re tar the driveway it seems to be a huge amount of money they want, in that case 600 per apt, (600 x 12). The annual management fee is reletivley low for the area, but I think they are just chancing their arm with the mostly elderly owners. The place is starting to look a bit unloved.

There has never an AGM with this mangement co/building co. and I think they should be removed from all dealings with the property and a new managment co put in place. There is no sinking fund either. Its just all a bit messy really. How can I get rid of em.

Any thoughts or advice would be great.


----------



## ClubMan (21 Jun 2006)

Are you 100% sure that the management company is controlled by the developer and was never handed over to the householders' control as is common (normal?)? Does the management company engage an agent to do the day to day management of the development? Do your property deeds include any legal documentation (e.g. leases/covenants) relating to the management company and householders' rights and obligations? Have the housholders established a residents association or committee to represent themselves in dealings with the developer/management company?


----------



## rippedoff (21 Jun 2006)

Hi clubman
The common areas have yet to be handed over to the residents. The developer hires a gardner, electrician or whatever when needs be. There is as yet no residents assoc, again elderly population. If someone needs to a broken light in the car park fixed for example they call the developer directly. 

Not sure about leases/covenants relating to the management company and householders' rights and obligations?


----------



## ClubMan (21 Jun 2006)

rippedoff said:
			
		

> The common areas have yet to be handed over to the residents.


This is outstanding since the 1980s?!?


> The developer hires a gardner, electrician or whatever when needs be. There is as yet no residents assoc, again elderly population. If someone needs to a broken light in the car park fixed for example they call the developer directly.


Do you get any information such as an annual report, budget etc. about the management company?


> Not sure about leases/covenants relating to the management company and householders' rights and obligations?


You need to check the legal documentation for your property so. If you have a mortgage then the lender will hold these. If you have no mortgage then you should have these yourself or lodged them for safekeeping somewhere.


----------



## rippedoff (21 Jun 2006)

We get a breakdown of costs with the annual bill and thats it. It adds up but you would wonder...

I will pull out a copy of lease docs that I'm sure I have. I think that legally they must hold an AGM.


----------



## ClubMan (21 Jun 2006)

Are you saying that all householders are members/shareholders of the management company but that the developer somehow controls it? If the management company is a limited company then it is obliged to hold _AGMs_, elect directors, file returns (in most cases) etc. If householders are not shareholders then they are not entitled to attend/vote. You really need to check out the legalities of the management company arrangement. If in doubt ask your conveyancing solicitor. If householders are shareholders and unhappy with the current setup then they should organise/mobilise to effect changes.


----------



## cbc (21 Jun 2006)

I have an interest in a number of management companies as a developer. most investors will tell me to scram when I ask them to take it over or pay charges, someday I hope to recoup my cash for what it is costing me to maintan the companies, when they want to sell then I strike!


----------



## rippedoff (22 Jun 2006)

CBC,

I dont really understand, what charges ?


----------



## Guest107 (22 Jun 2006)

management charges owed to the management company .

I would never buy an apartment unless there was a fully functioning owner (occupier and investor)  owned management company with published accounts .....and solvent. 

Thank God for Freehold


----------



## ClubMan (22 Jun 2006)

2Pack said:
			
		

> Thank God for Freehold


 Our house is freehold but the common areas of the estate (which is private but not gated in and with a public right of way through it) are not so we have a management company to manage these and housholders sign a management company lease and become members/shareholders. The annual management charge is €270 this year. Only c. 20 members out of 140 housholds bothered to attend the last _AGM _the other week.


----------



## Guest107 (22 Jun 2006)

ClubMan said:
			
		

> Only c. 20 members out of 140 housholds bothered to attend the last _AGM _the other week.


Yes but everybody got the annual report and its solvent and the voted upon works are being done by the agent and there are no liabilities I trust . 

Its probably a perfectly functional company albeit with low participation rates (not unusual) but functional  is the important thing .

Thank god for the One Acre Freehold witha house on it then


----------



## ClubMan (22 Jun 2006)

2Pack said:
			
		

> Yes but everybody got the annual report and its solvent and the voted upon works are being done by the agent and there are no liabilities I trust .
> 
> Its probably a perfectly functional company albeit with low participation rates (not unusual) but functional  is the important thing .


 Yes. I was just clarifying that a freehold property doesn't necessarily imply the absence of a management company as might be suggested by your penultimate post.


----------



## rippedoff (23 Jun 2006)

Clubman,

I have been able to asertain that all owners are actually members of the management company. I will just hassle them to organise an AGM. I have been told that its illegal not to have these (AGM) and could lead to an audit etc...

Also I know they have plans to build a 2 penthouses on the roof if they get planning. I would not want this to happen for various reasons so would object. I assume they need the backing of the owners of the existing apartments...?


----------



## ClubMan (23 Jun 2006)

rippedoff said:
			
		

> I have been able to asertain that all owners are actually members of the management company. So that means that  I will just hassle them to organise an AGM. I have been told that its illegal not to have these (AGM) and could lead to an audit etc...


You should also hassle the members to get active with their management company rather than letting the builder control matters. It's in their own interest.


> Also I know they have plans to build a 2 penthouses on the roof if they get planning. I would not want this to happen for various reasons so would object. I assume they need the backing of the owners of the existing apartments...?


Not sure - sorry. Apart from normal planning issues there may be some relevant information in the documentation relating to the management company (i.e. management lease/covenant and the company's memorandum and articles of association).


----------

