# Complaint from Management Co about Party



## jenolan (23 May 2005)

Hi,

A friend of mine got a letter from the Management Co who look after her estate saying that they'd received a complaint from a neighbour about the noise from a party she had. 

The party was on a Sat night and there were no extraordinary goings on. Also this is not something that happens regularly I'd say there's been 2 parties in the year she's lived there. Her direct neighbours were at the party but someone 2 doors down called in on the night to ask us to keep it down so it was obviously him who did the dirty deed and complained

Other than it being an unreasonable thing to do what is the situation with something like this where a management co are involved. She owns the house so she's not a lodger or anything. What rights do the management co have and can people not have parties in their house anymore on a Sat night - I would completely understand his point if it was a weeknight or something.


----------



## ClubMan (23 May 2005)

jenolan said:
			
		

> Her direct neighbours were at the party but someone 2 doors down called in on the night to ask us to keep it down so it was obviously him who did the dirty deed and complained



You can't really know that for sure without corroboration.



> what is the situation with something like this where a management co are involved.



She should check the terms & conditions of the management agreement which she presumably signed on purchase of the property. There is often a clause covering the management company involvement in day to day matters such as this. I would be very surprised if the management company wrote such a letter without having the authority to do so. What else did it say? Did they say what might happen if there were further similar incidents?


----------



## contemporary (23 May 2005)

Ignore them, I have no time for my management company. Mine pi$$ed and moaned about my sky dish but its still there. People take management companies far too seriously IMO.


----------



## ClubMan (23 May 2005)

contemporary said:
			
		

> Ignore them, I have no time for my management company.



If you are a householder then *YOU* are (at least in part) the management company as a shareholder!


----------



## contemporary (23 May 2005)

correct clubman, and as shareholder I can ignore them, management companies arent real companies IMHO, they are not there to make the shareholders money hence why I dont take them seriously. I find it some cheek for a management company to tell you that you cant have a sky dish on your building or that you cant have a party for a property you own and pay for and request an annual service charge for the previllage. 

I find it a good idea to ask the management company for a draft budget at the start of thr year and pick them up on their faults when they dont comply with same


----------



## ClubMan (23 May 2005)

contemporary said:
			
		

> correct clubman, and as shareholder I can ignore them, management companies arent real companies IMHO, they are not there to make the shareholders money hence why I dont take them seriously.



Well they are incorporated as real companies anyway and have well defined responsibilities. Lots of organisations are set up as not for profit companies but it doesn't mean that they are any less a company than a profit making one.



> I find it some cheek for a management company to tell you that you cant have a sky dish on your building or that you cant have a party for a property you own and pay for and request an annual service charge for the previllage.



How is it "some cheek" when these powers were clearly divulged to you at the time of the property purchase in the form of a management company agreement which you signed? 



> I find it a good idea to ask the management company for a draft budget at the start of thr year and pick them up on their faults when they dont comply with same



I agree - it's a good idea for owner/shareholders to keep tabs on the operation of the management company and ideally to get involved in their operation by running for election to the board where possible.


----------



## contemporary (23 May 2005)

ClubMan said:
			
		

> How is it "some cheek" when these powers were clearly divulged to you at the time of the property purchase in the form of a management company agreement which you signed?


 
Insofar as if you want to buy here you have to sign the management company agreement, there is no opt out. I have heard plenty of horror stories about management companies increasing fees after a few years of occuption etc. I suppose they are just a pet peeve.


----------



## tiger (23 May 2005)

> She owns the house so she's not a lodger or anything


 
Leasehold or Freehold?

If it's a lease, and she's in breach of the terms, then the mgmt company would be involved and she may not want to totaly ignore it.  
If it's freehold, then I would have thought it's more an issue for corporation/gardai/public nusiance etc.


----------



## ClubMan (23 May 2005)

Isn't it possible for a freehold property to be part of a private development which is not taken in charge by the local authority and overseen by a management company instead? I can't remember whether our house is freehold or leasehold but I think it's the former and it is on private property (not gated in or anything and with a pedestrian right of way through - but still technically private) and we have a management company which is responsible for the maintenance of the development.


----------



## Gabriel (23 May 2005)

contemporary said:
			
		

> correct clubman, and as shareholder I can ignore them, management companies arent real companies IMHO, they are not there to make the shareholders money hence why I dont take them seriously. I find it some cheek for a management company to tell you that you cant have a sky dish on your building or that you cant have a party for a property you own and pay for and request an annual service charge for the previllage.
> 
> I find it a good idea to ask the management company for a draft budget at the start of thr year and pick them up on their faults when they dont comply with same




I'd have to agree with a large part of this, at least in theory.

I've had a lot of dealings with my management company since I bought my house and have found them to be utterly useless in nearly all regards. While I'm not at the point where I'd consider ousting them and forming some neighbourly management co myself just yet...were they to send me a letter like that, in those particular circumstance it would quickly get filed under 'to be ignored' in the kitchen bin.


----------



## Havana (23 May 2005)

As someone who gets up at 6am on a Saturday and sunday morning to go to work, people need to remember that its not only mid- week that people need to be up early. In saying this however I would not run straight to the management committee or gardai for a once off occurance. But I have done (along with others in our block) for a persistant 'offender'.


----------



## RainyDay (23 May 2005)

jenolan said:
			
		

> but someone 2 doors down called in on the night to ask us to keep it down


And what response did they get on the night?


----------



## Sherman (25 May 2005)

More likely than not your friend only has a long lease in her apartment e.g. 500 or 999 years. The management company probably 'owns' the freehold, and is therefore technically the landlord.

Assuming the above is the case, when your friend bought she would have signed a lease - this lease document without a doubt has covenants on the part of the tenant. Usually there is a tenant's covenant to the effect that noise etc. after say 10pm must not interefere with the other occupants. 

If your friend persisted in this behaviour, a long way down the line (e.g. well after complaints, letters, legal threats etc.) the management company, as landlord, could theoretically take steps to have your friend ejected for breach of the covenants in the lease. 

Anyone who, like previous posters, consistently ignore legitmate requests/threats from management companies re breaches of covenants, is playing a dangerous game that could theoretically end up costing them a lot of money through the courts.


----------



## Purple (25 May 2005)

If the person two doors down has very small children then asking for the noise to be kept down doesn't seem unreasonable. Without knowing what the full circumstances were it's impossible to comment on the specifics. My personal experience of management companies where I lived was that they were c**p.


----------



## zag (26 May 2005)

From what I can see, the management company only sent a letter saying they had received a complaint.

They didn't request or order a ban on noise from 2200, or they didn't seek compensation from the tenant.

They sent a letter.  What's the big deal.

Maybe the party was extra noisy, maybe the people in the party didn't realise it, maybe it wasn't that noisy at all.  The company just sent a letter saying they had received a complaint.

You might think that the management company is being a pain in the behind - feel free to ignore them.  Then when some neighbour decides park their juggernaut outside your house and insist on starting it at 0600 every morning your friend will know who not to complain to.

z


----------



## contemporary (26 May 2005)

zag said:
			
		

> You might think that the management company is being a pain in the behind - feel free to ignore them. Then when some neighbour decides park their juggernaut outside your house and insist on starting it at 0600 every morning your friend will know who not to complain to.
> 
> z


 
I dont know about you, but if I have a problem with one of my neighbours I talk to them, and dont get into a hissy and complain to the management company. Complaining via the management company antagonises the other party IMO, while a reasonable word with them works much better


----------



## zag (26 May 2005)

I don't have a management company to complain to, so I don't know what I would do.

From reading the original mail it seems the neighbours did complain directly on the night.

What would you do if you complained to the juggernaut driver, he said "points noted" and then continued to park outside your house ?

z


----------



## contemporary (26 May 2005)

Have another word and then a complaint to the gardai..... I assume thats what most people would do if they didnt have a management company to complain to


----------



## Gabriel (26 May 2005)

Sherman said:
			
		

> More likely than not your friend only has a long lease in her apartment e.g. 500 or 999 years. The management company probably 'owns' the freehold, and is therefore technically the landlord.
> 
> Assuming the above is the case, when your friend bought she would have signed a lease - this lease document without a doubt has covenants on the part of the tenant. Usually there is a tenant's covenant to the effect that noise etc. after say 10pm must not interefere with the other occupants.
> 
> ...




I'd be very surprised if the above was theoretically true. What you're describing is a rent situation. Where you have a mortgage on a property, you don't, strictly speaking, own the land, but you DO own the property. The agreement you sign is an agreement with the management company. I would say there would need to be severe anti-social behaviour going on, and the gardai/courts involved for any sort of eviction to take place and even then it would be a court order (not a management company) that would make that call.


----------



## Round Tuit (26 May 2005)

The management company are hired by all owners via their elected Board. It's worth bearing in mind that if you are not happy with them, you can fire them and hire someone else. We did this recently in my development. I do know that on the lease I signed when I purchased my property there were rules regarding parking of commercial vehicles, satellite dishes and noise between midnight and 8am - and I for 1 am quite happy they were there.


----------



## ClubMan (26 May 2005)

Round Tuit said:
			
		

> The management company are hired by all owners via their elected Board. .



This is incorrect. The management company is an entity owned/controlled by the householders as shareholders in the company. The householders/shareholders elect a board who oversee the operation of the management company. The management company through the board of directors usually engages the services of a management agent/agency to deal with the day to day management of the development. The agent is simply a client of the company and acts on its instructions. Many people mix up the company and the agent and the rights/responsibilities of each.


----------



## ClubMan (26 May 2005)

contemporary said:
			
		

> I dont know about you, but if I have a problem with one of my neighbours I talk to them, and dont get into a hissy and complain to the management company. Complaining via the management company antagonises the other party IMO, while a reasonable word with them works much better



A few times over the years I've had problems with the residents of (usually rented) properties in the development throwing parties which got out of hand in which case I attempted to make my complaints in person directly but when that generally failed (it's difficult to reason with people when they are pissed/stoned) I just called the _Gardaí _who soon sorted matters. Except in the case of habitual transgressions I would generally not bother involving the management company/agent. There was one incident when a bloke at one of these parties literally ran across the roof of the two story terrace of houses. I attempted to "reason" with him directly but luckily I was restrained by somebody else!


----------



## Round Tuit (26 May 2005)

Clubman - you're absolutely correct and I did mix up the terminology, and your clarification is very clear. When it comes to getting letters about complaints etc I would have thought the Board would probably get the agents to do that - I know the contact number for my agents, but I don't know the numbers of the Board members - I just about know 1 of them to see. Would I be correct?  I'd agree that most problems are in relation to renters who probably aren't aware of the contents of the lease their landlord signed on purchase.


----------



## ClubMan (26 May 2005)

In my case I generally report issues (e.g. to do with grounds/garden maintenance, street lighting problems, nuisance parking etc.) directly to out management agent (and by email at that) and they generally take care of them. I would not really know the directors of our management company and have missed most of the _AGMs _in recent years because they are held in the late Summer/early Autumn when I normally take off on holidays. I wouldn't normally report anything other than complaints about the management agent themselves to the directors. That's how I operate anyway!


----------



## jenolan (30 May 2005)

Hi,

Thanks for all the replies. I do agree that having a management company can be a good thing and yes if someone is a repeat offender in whatever it is they are doing then by all means complain to high heavens but I suppose my gripe all boils down to the fact that the horrbile neighbour actually went to the trouble of making an offical complaint over a once off incident. 

Although these agreements do say no loud music etc after 12am in theory it's not great is it? Are people supposed to throw out their guests or say right that's it no more music as it's after midnight? People are always going to have parties in their houses and as long as it's not happening all the time is it not acceptable to have the odd one on  occasion. With smoking bans and pub prices more and more people are staying in now and the whole business of taking these things too seriously is a bit Big Brotherish don't you think where we can't do what we want in our own homes (obviously within reason)


----------



## ClubMan (30 May 2005)

If a householder/management company shareholder objects to certain rules laid down then presumably they could lobby the other members and propose a motion at a general meeting to have them changed?


----------



## MargeSimpson (31 May 2005)

When we bought our house we signed a 'good neighbour' agreement. But I think that there may be a private Mgmt co taking over the estate soon. Do we have the option of not joining?


----------



## ClubMan (31 May 2005)

MargeSimpson said:
			
		

> But I think that there may be a private Mgmt co taking over the estate soon. Do we have the option of not joining?



That sounds unusual. Was the development previously taken in charge by the local authority and is it now moving to private management? I've heard of developments going from private managament to being taken in charge by the local authority but not the other way. Can you explain the context of this change?


----------



## MargeSimpson (31 May 2005)

We have never had a private Mgmt co, but now that the estate is finished it was implied that someone was taking over the maintenace of the estate.


----------



## ClubMan (31 May 2005)

OK - that's different. I didn't realise that the development was still work in progress but is now nearing completion. You should check with your solicitor as to what agreements, if any, you have already signed covenanting to join a management company arrangement. My guess is that if the plan was always to have the development under private management then you have already signed undertakings to join.


----------



## CCOVICH (31 May 2005)

ClubMan said:
			
		

> If a householder/management company shareholder objects to certain rules laid down then presumably they could lobby the other members and propose a motion at a general meeting to have them changed?



Has anyone ever done this and if so, was it easy to do?  I would have thought that it would be fairly complicated, as each apartment owner would have to sign a new agreement, which would invlove solicitors and hence €€€.


----------



## ClubMan (31 May 2005)

It could well be. In spite of having signed one I'm not totally au fait with how the management agreement is structured/phrased and if/how the management company can change aspects of it.  I could be completely wrong and the rules to be adhered to are in a separate legal agreement/covenant while the shareholders can only change rules (e.g. articles and/or memorandum of association) relating to the company itself.


----------



## CCOVICH (2 Jun 2005)

Something for me to investigate then.  I'll post my findings.


----------

