# Are you legally obliged to pay management fees to a co looking after apartment cmplx?



## Cracker

Hi

I am just wondering are you legally obliged to pay management fees to a company looking after an apartment complex?  Who decides on the which management company? And what exactly are they responsible for?


----------



## CCOVICH

*Re: Management Companies?*

You (the owners) are the management company. You pay a management fee to an agent, which includes their fee and a fess for refuse charges, maintenance etc. The agent is initially chosen by the developer. 

If it is a new apartment, you have more than likely signed a (legally binding) contract that you will pay fees. If not, you can be taken to court. You cannot sell the apartment unless fees paid are up to date.

There is plenty of dicussion elsewhere on the site on management companies etc.


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*



Cracker said:


> Hi
> 
> I am just wondering are you legally obliged to pay management fees to a company looking after an apartment complex?  Who decides on the which management company? And what exactly are they responsible for?


Read the management company lease agreement that came with your house deeds and which your presumably signed. Better still read this before signing it and so you can decide in advance if the terms are acceptable to you.


----------



## ITGuru

*Management Company Fee Rip Off !*

.
As in any other sector people in Ireland are ripped off by management companies by extracting un-justifiable amount. What they do and what we pay actually doesnt match? 

It is a pity that politicians dont care , react and respond when people are exploited (Except the residents of TYRELLSTOWN who have joined hands and challenged the fee at the court, at least they are not sleeping !). We just pay whatever we are asked to pay even with out knowing what it is for or any other alternatives. In many of the cases it is developers own company which is masquerading as the management company. I think, the residents should have the right to choose the management company.

At least there is a debate now. Hope it wont end like any other Rip off discussion !


----------



## CCOVICH

*Re: Management Company Fee Rip Off !*



ITGuru said:


> As in any other sector people in Ireland are ripped off by management companies by extracting un-justifiable amount. What they do and what we pay actually doesnt match?


 
Not true in all cases-I am happy enough at how our fees are allocated/spent.



			
				ITGuru said:
			
		

> We just pay whatever we are asked to pay even with out knowing what it is for or any other alternatives. In many of the cases it is developers own company which is masquerading as the management company. I think, the residents should have the right to choose the management company.


 
Again, not true in all cases.  Our managing agent has no connection with the developer, the owners have representation on the board, and owners could fire the managing agent and hire someone else (or do it themselves) to manage the development.

I'm not saying that every development is run as ours, but it is not true to say that the situation is as you have described in all cases.


----------



## Satanta

*Re: Management Company Fee Rip Off !*



ITGuru said:


> We just pay whatever we are asked to pay even with out knowing what it is for or any other alternatives.



Again, not true. Our management fees come with a full breakdown of costs for each element of the management of the complex. The breakdown clearly shows the different prices paid by different appartments (i.e. 2 bed vs. 3 bed vs. aparts served by lift) and how the costs were allocated.

Anyone with issues over the costs could clearly see where the figures were drawn from and doing some homework show that the fees were an accurate reflection of the work.


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Company Fee Rip Off !*



ITGuru said:


> .
> As in any other sector people in Ireland are ripped off by management companies by extracting un-justifiable amount. What they do and what we pay actually doesnt match?


For the umpteenth time ... in most cases the householders are or will eventually be shareholders/owners of the management company so if they're not happy with the way things are run they have the power to change things. For example by running for election to the board of directors, becoming involved in committees, changing the management agent employed, or even doing a hands on job on the day to day management of the estate. Nobody is forced to buy in a privately managed estate so if they don't like such a setup they should look elsewhere. In general I don't see that there's any rip off here.


> It is a pity that politicians dont care


I got the letter in the post the other day about some move by the _Government _to examine the whole issue of private management companies in the wider context of the _Law Reform Commission's _study of this area.


> I think, the residents should have the right to choose the management company.


I suspect that you are confusing management agent and management company here.


----------



## prech

*Re: Management Companies?*

Hi,

i recently bought a house in Beaupark and the term being used by the builder was "no fees no Keys" so you have to pay the first year if you want to sign for your house.  Beaupark is still a building site and very little is being done, apart from Bins being collected.

I agree with fees for Apt buildings (lifts and carpets etc), but when where they introduced for houses in estates, do i not pay tax for the DCC to come in and clean roads, ensure lights are working and general upkeep of the area.  Is this not another form of Double taxation.

I will not be paying these the second year!!


----------



## HighFlier

*Re: Management Companies?*

Unfortunately you will.


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*



prech said:


> i recently bought a house in Beaupark and the term being used by the builder was "no fees no Keys" so you have to pay the first year if you want to sign for your house.


I thought that this was the rule rather than the exception?


> Beaupark is still a building site and very little is being done, apart from Bins being collected.


 Then *your *management company should have a healthy surplus/sinking fund on its first year of accounts so.


> I agree with fees for Apt buildings (lifts and carpets etc), but when where they introduced for houses in estates, do i not pay tax for the DCC to come in and clean roads, ensure lights are working and general upkeep of the area.  Is this not another form of Double taxation.


 If it is then it's perfectly avoidable by buying in an estate that is or will be taken in charge by the _Local Authority_. Nobody is forced to buy in a privately managed development.


> I will not be paying these the second year!!


 This could be cutting off your nose to spite your face by not enabling *your *management company to do the job required and in relation to which you presumably signed a legally binding lease agreement.


----------



## prech

*Re: Management Companies?*



ClubMan said:


> I thought that this was the rule rather than the exception?
> Then *your *management company should have a healthy surplus/sinking fund on its first year of accounts so.
> 
> That remains to be seen, trying to contact them is hard enough, getting a breakdown of funds allocated to Beaupark will be a nightmare, if not impossible.
> 
> f it is then it's perfectly avoidable by buying in an estate that is or will be taken in charge by the _Local Authority_. Nobody is forced to buy in a privately managed development.
> 
> Its not a private estate, DCC will not come into any new housing estate until it is completely signed off, Beapark could take until 2009 to be signed off, therefore I am forced to get a mgt company in, my question was that "when and how did DCC make that decision not to enter these new estates" As a lot of these mgnt companyies are cash cows for builders I imagine they and our leaders exchanged some brown paper bags to seal the deal.
> 
> This could be cutting off your nose to spite your face by not enabling *your *management company to do the job required and in relation to which you presumably signed a legally binding lease agreement.


 
Not sure what i signed regards to mgnt fees, signed a lot of stuff around that time, but can find nothing that ties me to them. Either way i don't pay for services i do not rec.


----------



## HighFlier

*Re: Management Companies?*

If you don't pay a) you can be sued and b) you can never sell the house legally. I strongly advise you to find what you signed and what you committed to as it won't go away. Also your neighbours won't feel too kindly about it.

The new practice of management fees on individual houses is a builders scam but until laws to prohibit this are passed it's legal and just a way of the builder passing on his liabilities to you.


----------



## CCOVICH

*Re: Management Companies?*



prech said:


> Not sure what i signed regards to mgnt fees, signed a lot of stuff around that time, but can find nothing that ties me to them. Either way i don't pay for services i do not rec.


 
Never sign anything you don't understand.  The document that sets out the agreement between the management company and the individual owner is usually called the leasehold agreement.  Ask your solicitor to explain.

When you say 



			
				prech said:
			
		

> Either way i don't pay for services i do not rec


 
what do you mean?

Management fees are based on a budget.  If the budget is not spent, as ClubMan says, there will be a surplus in the accounts, which can be set against future service payments, or diverted to a sinking fund, which covers major projects like repainting etc. 

The breakdown of the fees received and how they are spent should be detailed in the annual accounts, which should be distributed to all owners/members, and then discussed at the AGM.  If this isn't happening, you should be asking questions, refusing to pay is a last resort.


----------



## CCOVICH

*Re: Management Companies?*

Let's turn this on it's head for a second-say you live in one of 300 hundred apartments-how would you deal with refuse, maintenance. lighting of common areas etc.?  Remember, there has been a huge increase in large scale apartment-heavy developments in Ireland in the last 10 years-is it realistic to expect your local council to service all developments in a timely and satisfactory fashion?


----------



## prech

*Re: Management Companies?*

I take your points, i have just become synical in regards to these companies,, they seem to be a law onto themselves.

I don't sign anything I don't understand, and from my records cannot find any agreement between myself and mgnt company, but will consult s

Election is coming up will blast any politican unlucky enough to knock my door.

Thanx


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*



prech said:


> I take your points, i have just become synical in regards to these companies,, they seem to be a law onto themselves.


They are not - they are normally limited companies owned by the householders who are members/shareholders who have full control over their operation. Painting it as a them and us situation is missing the point.


> I don't sign anything I don't understand, and from my records cannot find any agreement between myself and mgnt company, but will consult s


 Do your records contain a fully set/copy of all the legal documentation that you signed as part of the property purchase process? If not then you should indeed check with your solicitor.


> Election is coming up will blast any politican unlucky enough to knock my door.


 Why? It's not their problem or concern that you or others decided to buy in a privately managed development and now, after the fact, don't like it.


----------



## prech

*Re: Management Companies?*



> Why? It's not their problem or concern that you or others decided to buy in a privately managed development and now, after the fact, don't like it.


 
its not a private estate, its just DCC somewhere along the line, took the decision not to enter these estates until signed off by builder/DCC.  When this is signed off they will enter and maintain it, as they should thats what i pay my taxes for.

This was my orginal q, when and where was this decided, in effect I am paying 2 agencies to do the same job.


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*



prech said:


> its not a private estate, its just DCC somewhere along the line, took the decision not to enter these estates until signed off by builder/DCC.


Presumably you were aware of this situation when buying and went ahead regardless? Your choice. If you were not aware of this then you should be asking your solicitor why s/he didn't apprise you of this important issue.


----------



## prech

*Re: Management Companies?*



ClubMan said:


> Presumably you were aware of this situation when buying and went ahead regardless? Your choice. If you were not aware of this then you should be asking your solicitor why s/he didn't apprise you of this important issue.


 
Your missing the big picture here.

Its not that I knew or didn't know, because i was aware of it "no fees, no keys" there's a catchphrase for it, for Gods sake.

Why has this situation arose without our leaders doing something about it, (maybe because the building trade donates a lot of money to party funds or invites them to sponsored race days....go figure)     the first couple of years are the hardest in a new home, yet you get this fee lumped on you for a service you should be getting for being a tax payer in this country anyway. 

you seem to have accepted a form of double taxation very easily.


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*



prech said:


> Your missing the big picture here.


How?


> Why has this situation arose without our leaders doing something about it, (maybe because the building trade donates a lot of money to party funds or invites them to sponsored race days....go figure)     the first couple of years are the hardest in a new home, yet you get this fee lumped on you for a service you should be getting for being a tax payer in this country anyway.


Please take rants to _Letting Off Steam_ and stick to discussing the issue in hand. Thanks.


> you seem to have accepted a form of double taxation very easily.


I'm just pointing out that nobody is forced to buy in a development which is privately managed either short term (e.g. until the _LA _takes it in charge) or longer term (e.g. indefinitely).


----------



## prech

*Re: Management Companies?*



			
				ClubMan said:
			
		

> Please take rants to _Letting Off Steam_ and stick to discussing the issue in hand. Thanks.


 
I thought i was, guess we differ on why we discuss things



			
				ClubMan said:
			
		

> I'm just pointing out that nobody is forced to buy in a development which is privately managed either short term (e.g. until the _LA _takes it in charge) or longer term (e.g. indefinitely).


 
Well why don't you point out a new dev in Dublin that doesn't have a mgnt fee intially. No choice equals forced....


----------



## whackin

*Re: Management Companies?*

I have to agree, it's like telling someone who complains about Bad Hospitals "Well nobody is forcing you to go o hospital!", it's a fairly stupid argument. It is almost impossible to find new developments that don't charge fees


----------



## CCOVICH

*Re: Management Companies?*



whackin said:


> it's a fairly stupid argument. It is almost impossible to find new developments that don't charge fees


 

Who is arguing that you *have to* buy a *new* property?

And to use your example of the health service, would you want your development managed in the same way as the HSE??????


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*

Who says that all new developments involve management fees - temporarily or indefinitely?


> it's a fairly stupid argument


----------



## whackin

*Re: Management Companies?*



ClubMan said:


> Who says that all new developments involve management fees - temporarily or indefinitely?



My apologies for that. It wasn't intended to cause offence.


----------



## cnu

*Re: Management Companies?*

Somewhere in the post it was said "Never sign anything that you dont understand" - Agreed and fully acknowledged.

Here is the scenario, you have been hoping to have your dream home the one u want, and you waited enough and all those patience...One fine morning your solictor calls you and says sign up the documents [you are expecting them to b the bank drafts or other non-management related docs ] and the solicitor says "This house is maintained by Management"....aaaah as a new buyer you'd have nooooooo clue what this management fees is about, but the excitement of getting the keys for your house is too high and you sign it off...

In short, what I mean to say is, this is the thing that management will take advantage off.  In a fair game the EA should explain that this house has the management fees.  Do they say it?  Some of EA's say they'd get back and they NEVER get back to you.  Its a sorry state.  I think its not well communicated to the buyer.  Am sure the Buyer will have a second thought once he is aware that the house comes with a management fees.

...my 2 cents


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*



cnu said:


> In short, what I mean to say is, this is the thing that management will take advantage off.  In a fair game the EA should explain that this house has the management fees.  Do they say it?  Some of EA's say they'd get back and they NEVER get back to you.  Its a sorry state.  I think its not well communicated to the buyer.


I bought a house in 1995 and the _EA _clearly stated up front that the development (which is technically private but is not gated and has a public right of way through) would not be taken in charge by the _LA_, would be privately managed, that there was a management company of which the householders would be members/shareholders and that annual management fees would be payable (the first year on closing). Obviously my solicitor also pointed out these issues separately. Maybe this transparency was/is unusual but I would imagine that even with a basic level of "due diligence" the potential buyer will know in advance what the situation is with regard to management and fees.


----------



## ITGuru

*Many members act as management company agents !*

Many members speak about the management fee , as if they are management company agents. I dont mind paying a "Nominal Justifiable Fee" for the management of the estate to a management company.



CCOVICH said:


> Who is arguing that you *have to* buy a *new* property?


I dont think anyone "sane" would buy a 20 year old property for 360K when a new one is available for the same price.



ClubMan said:


> Why? It's not their problem or concern that you or others decided to buy in a privately managed development and now, after the fact, don't like it.


Then what you think, the role of politicians is, in a democratic country?
Silently watch their people being exploited by greedy companies !



prech said:


> Well why don't you point out a new dev in Dublin that doesn't have a mgnt fee intially. No choice equals forced....


Could you tell me about at least one development without management fee? All the county councils have made it mandatory to have a management company to get the planning permission approved.

I am talking for people with average income. Members who supported the "hefty" management company fee here, might be millionanires who might have won a euro million recently!


----------



## whackin

*Re: Management Companies?*

I agree, while it is all very well to say you don't have to buy in an estate with managment fees it is completely counter-reality. If you are trying to buy your first home you don't have many options and you ahve to take what you are situation dictates. But surely that doesn't mean you don't have the right to complain about it afterwards? The management company issue is one which is a big issue for a lot of people and a simplistic "you should have have bought elsewhere" attitude really does not help things at all.


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Many members act as management company agents !*



ITGuru said:


> Many members speak about the management fee , as if they are management company agents.


I don't understand what you mean. Your terminology is confusing. See the definitions of management *company *and management *agent/agency *earlier in this thread and many others.


> I dont mind paying a "Nominal Justifiable Fee" for the management of the estate to a management company.


Which would be...?


> Then what you think, the role of politicians is, in a democratic country?
> Silently watch their people being exploited by greedy companies !


Nobody is necessarily exploited here. People are free not to buy in a privately managed area if that arrangement does not suit them.


> I am talking for people with average income. Members who supported the "hefty" management company fee here, might be millionanires who might have won a euro million recently!


Who here "supported a 'hefty' management company fee"? It might help if you argued your point based on what was actually posted here and not what you imagined was posted.


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*



whackin said:


> But surely that doesn't mean you don't have the right to complain about it afterwards?


Of course not but many people seem to act as if they are powerless pawns in these situations when, in fact, they are active principals in the legal agreement underpinning the management company. Also - moaning about them (the management company) and us (the poor householders) is missing the point in most cases since there is no "them" at all. If people don't like how their management company is operating then they should get actively involved to change matters rather than expecting the state to step in and act for them.


----------



## CCOVICH

*Re: Many members act as management company agents !*



			
				ITGuru said:
			
		

> I dont think anyone "sane" would buy a 20 year old property for 360K when a new one is available for the same price.


 
Nonsense. Having bought a new property previously, I would never do so again if I had the choice, and that has nothing to do with the existence of management companies.



			
				ITGuru said:
			
		

> Then what you think, the role of politicians is, in a democratic country?
> Silently watch their people being exploited by greedy companies !


 
Take talk of politics to _Letting Off Steam,_ where it belongs (when you have enough posts to do so).



ITGuru said:


> I am talking for people with average income. Members who supported the "hefty" management company fee here, might be millionanires who might have won a euro million recently!


 
Far from it. I have bought a house. I will pay refuse charges, buildings insurance, cut my own grass, pay into a residents association to keep grass cut etc. There will be very little difference in what I pay when all that is added up vs. what I currently pay in management fees.

Like I said, it is completely unrealistic to assume that local authorities will take over the management of all private apartment developments we have in Ireland today.

There is an article in today's Irish Times on management companies and two forthcoming reports from the Law Society and the National Consumer Agency. The thrust of the article was that the key issue is the handing over of developments to the owners, and this would be my concern, not the existence of a management company and payment of fees.

And the article refers to a development (Castlecurragh-Blanchardstown) where Fingal County Council took the estate in charge when the residents refused to pay their management fees. Happy days? Not quite. The estate in question was developed by the council in a PPP with the developer, not a common situation. And, to quote _".....the council is adamnant that there will continue to be a service charge, albeit reduced. It appears that if the residents want the landscaped areas tended to properly, they will have to pay for it themselves"_


So do people really believe that modern, large scale, apartment developments could be run without (a) a management company and related fees; and (b) an appointed agent to run the development day-to-day?


----------



## Guest107

*Re: Management Companies?*



ClubMan said:


> Of course not but many people seem to act as if they are powerless pawns in these situations when, in fact, they are active principals in the legal agreement underpinning the management company.



Many ARE powerless pawns . The developer has gets outs where he does not form the management company such as when he holds onto one apartment out of 200.

Then there IS no management company in ewffect and the developer can charge what he likes to empty the bins and hire himself as agent at extortionate rates  and tough **** on you, the purchaser.

Where the developer has gone and left a proper finished estate in the hands of the owners its different of course .

The law in Ireland is pathetic on this but seeing as the same politicians cannot provide schools either whats surprising ???


----------



## CCOVICH

*Re: Management Companies?*



2Pack said:


> Then there IS no management company in ewffect and the developer can charge what he likes to empty the bins and hire himself as agent at extortionate rates and tough **** on you, the purchaser.


 
That is a fair point, and I won't stand up for developers lining their own pockets by charging extortionate fees to manage the development. As said previously however, in don't think that this is the case everywhere.  Where an independent agent is appointed, the owners generally benefit.



			
				2Pack said:
			
		

> Where the developer has gone and left a proper finished estate in the hands of the owners its different of course


 
And let's hope that the process will be speeded up on foot of forthcoming reports and possibly new legislation.


----------



## sarahw

*Re: Management Companies?*

Amazed that people buy in private dev. and don't understand what they have commited to, poor legal advice?.any shareholder(owner)can be proposed at agm to become a director of to mgt. company,a board of directors can appoint new managing agents if they wish to.Stop moaning and get involved, and begin to examine issues like budget,sinking fund


----------



## Guest107

*Re: Management Companies?*

People who buy into a Management Company should be income taxed 10% extra to force them to do a "Management Company Driving Test" and pass it in full .

Then they get their tax money back, until then they are guilty of being muppets and we should be Darwinian here  If you think you are too thick to pass it go buy somewhere else.


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*

I moved this thread from _Mortgages and Home Buying _to _Great Financial Debates _but it's looking like a further move to _Letting Off Steam _may be on the cards soon due to the stuff being posted by some...


----------



## exile

*Re: Management Companies?*

Why are the people who have never had any trouble with management companies so annoyed with the people who have?  If I'm giving someone advice in my area of expertise, I don't start by getting annoyed with the person who doesn't understand the area and tell them they should've known better before they got into the situation.

People buying new houses are often going to be novices and definitely pre-occupied with other things.  They're not going to sit down with the solicitor and say "Tell me every last thing that could turn out to be a headache in the next two years or so..."

Just because there are things they CAN do doesn't mean they should be put in the position in the first place.  It would seem that a little bit of regulation regarding management companies/agents wouldn't go amiss.  Why direct the anger at the exploited instead of the exploiters?

In what other situation would you consider with-holding payment to be a last resort?  It seems the most natural reaction if no service is received.


----------



## room305

*Re: Management Companies?*



sarahw said:


> Stop moaning and get involved, and begin to examine issues like budget,sinking fund



Almost 40% of management companies are trading illegally - not filing accounts, insolvent etc. When people see nothing being done by the maintenance company they stop paying maintenance, which in turn guarantees the maintenance company can no longer maintain the area even if they wanted to.

However, many posters here seem to think it is a simple matter to fire the existing directors and appoint new ones and then find a new property management company to manage the running of the estate. Speaking as someone going through this process at the moment I can tell you it most certainly isn't.


----------



## CCOVICH

*Re: Management Companies?*



exile said:


> Why are the people who have never had any trouble with management companies so annoyed with the people who have? If I'm giving someone advice in my area of expertise, I don't start by getting annoyed with the person who doesn't understand the area and tell them they should've known better before they got into the situation.
> 
> People buying new houses are often going to be novices and definitely pre-occupied with other things. They're not going to sit down with the solicitor and say "Tell me every last thing that could turn out to be a headache in the next two years or so..."
> 
> Just because there are things they CAN do doesn't mean they should be put in the position in the first place. It would seem that a little bit of regulation regarding management companies/agents wouldn't go amiss. Why direct the anger at the exploited instead of the exploiters?
> 
> In what other situation would you consider with-holding payment to be a last resort? It seems the most natural reaction if no service is received.


 
Nobody is getting annoyed-if someome has a specifc complaint and have taken this to the management company/agent and got nowhere-let's hear it?

And yes, there are lots of things to worry about when buying a house, but buyers should take their time and think of what happens 2 years down the line-buying property is a big step and not to be taken lightly. Any solicitors I have come accross do explain management compaines when the contracts are being signed (before which you can pull out without penalty), so most buyers are made aware of it before they buy.

And yes, regulation would be welcome, if it gets the development into the hands of the owners sooner rather than later.

And if someone is receiving absolutley no service, i.e. no bins being emptied, block insurance lapsing, electricity in hallways going, lifts not being maintained, then yes, by all means you should not be paying management fees.

But I have not heard anyone saying they are getting nothing for their management fees.


----------



## CCOVICH

*Re: Management Companies?*



room305 said:


> However, many posters here seem to think it is a simple matter to fire the existing directors and appoint new ones and then find a new property management company to manage the running of the estate. Speaking as someone going through this process at the moment I can tell you it most certainly isn't.


 
Agreed, it certainly isn't that simple in all cases, and another issue is the fact that owners can be denied the opportunity to apply for planning permission to make any changes to their development, and can be limited to services of the developer's choosing, such as cable TV etc.

Although it may be possible to fire directors, there doesn't appear to be any way to take _de facto_ control from the developer until such time as they want to hand over the development.  This is the area that needs to be addressed IMHO.


----------



## exile

*Re: Management Companies?*



CCOVICH said:


> But I have not heard anyone saying they are getting nothing for their management fees.



Well, I have since sold the house and moved on - but I was forced to pay management fees (I only did it twice, once to get the keys, once to be able to sell it) and received nothing in return.  The management company's accounts confirmed this.  "Income: X.  Expenditure: 0.  Net profit: X"

People did stop paying, and got weekly threatening letters.

I'm sure my solicitor explained to me that the initial management agent would be appointed by the developer and that later we would have the option to vote for directors who would have the power to change management agent if desired - and I'm sure I nodded.

But should I have been expected to ask: "What should I do if the developer forms a shelf company, coincidentally using the name and phone number of his solicitor, and appoints them as the management agent, who then does nothing?  What then?"  No - I had no knowledge of the area and therefore couldn't have been expected to forsee the possible problems.


----------



## CCOVICH

*Re: Management Companies?*



exile said:


> Well, I have since sold the house and moved on - but I was forced to pay management fees (I only did it twice, once to get the keys, once to be able to sell it) and received nothing in return. The management company's accounts confirmed this. "Income: X. Expenditure: 0. Net profit: X".


 
Fair enough-there was no maintenance of common areas etc., refuse collection? Did you ask why you were paying the fees?  (I'm genuinely interested)


----------



## exile

*Re: Management Companies?*



CCOVICH said:


> Fair enough-there was no maintenance of common areas etc., refuse collection? Did you ask why you were paying the fees?  (I'm genuinely interested)



Refuse collection for the houses was done by the council - normal situation of buying tags in Spar and attaching them to the bins.  I'm not sure about the apartments - possibly they had black bins too that the council collected?

The common areas around the houses were maintained by ourselves.  Some of the larger areas sometimes became fairly unkempt - I think the builder (who was still in the locality) may have sent someone to cut them every few months.

After paying the initial fees we got a letter after one year saying "We haven't spent any of that yet, so no fees this year."  I thought - very well.  The following year when they did ask for fees (but had still not spent any of the initial money) I was already selling the house and ignored the letters until such time as the house was sold and I found my solicitor had paid it - I guess he had to.  I know some of my neighbours were trying to rectify the situation at that point.


----------



## room305

*Re: Management Companies?*

Another problem is that you cannot choose your neighbours. Some people simply don't want to pay management fees fullstop. This can exacerbate existing problems. When it comes to getting rid of the management agents, they tend to want money before they will switch. Likewise when it comes to selling, as exile mentioned, if you don't pay up you cannot sell.

Imagine a situation where you moved into a new apartment and ordered a phone line. From sheer incompetence the phone company failed to install the phone line but they kept sending you regular bills (although they refused to give any details or breakdown on what the money was for). Later you went to sell your house but the solicitor blocked the sale until the phone company's bills were paid.

People living in estates where the management company is a sham are not powerless but is very difficult to find people who will agree to be nominated as directors, deal with the legal hassle etc.

New house owners who are buying houses should be given a charter for what the management company is supposed to do. That way both sides can know what is supposed to be done and where any faults will lie.


----------



## ITGuru

*Re: Management Companies?*

Hope someone would answer my queries:-
1. How could we make the management agent accountable for what we pay and what we get?
2. If the residents feel that they are paying too much , how to review the management fee?
3. How can the residents take a decision to change the management agent, by vote?
4.Once the property is handed over is there any role for the developer who built the estate?


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*



ITGuru said:


> 1. How could we make the management agent accountable for what we pay and what we get?


The management agent is contracted/employed by the management company to carry out the day to day management/maintenance of the development. the management company (i.e. the board of directors representing the shareholders/members) can hire and fire these and monitor their work as required.


> 2. If the residents feel that they are paying too much , how to review the management fee?


Raise the issue at a general meeting. Get elected to the board and get involved in the detailed setting and review of budgets and annual charges.


> 3. How can the residents take a decision to change the management agent, by vote?


If necessary I presume that they can call an _EGM _to deal with the matter.


> 4.Once the property is handed over is there any role for the developer who built the estate?


Handed over to whom?


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*



room305 said:


> Another problem is that you cannot choose your neighbours. Some people simply don't want to pay management fees fullstop.


Then it's up to the management company (often via the agent that they contract) to chase up these legally enforceable debts. The usual reminders, final reminder and solicitor's letter can be required.


----------



## CCOVICH

*Re: Management Companies?*



ClubMan said:


> Handed over to whom?


 
To either the local authority (not likely for apartments) or to the owners.


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*



CCOVICH said:


> To either the local authority (not likely for apartments) or to the owners.


OK - after the development is handed over to the _LA _then, as far as I know (there's a recent thread on this), the bond lodged with the _LA _by the developer is only refunded to the developer if/when it is clear that all relevant work (e.g. connections to utilities etc.) is completed to a satisfactory standard. If corrective/remedial work is required then the _LA _will take money out of the bond to do it if necessary. After the development is handed over to the owners then presumably the developer is liable (as normal) for major issues that arise for a period thereafter and, if necessary and relevant, _Homebond _may also get involved.

That's my general understanding anyway.


----------



## CCOVICH

*Re: Management Companies?*



ClubMan said:


> After the development is handed over to the owners then presumably the developer is liable (as normal) for major issues that arise for a period thereafter and, if necessary and relevant, _Homebond _may also get involved.


 
I wouldn't necessarily assume that to be the case-I would have thought that the owners would be liable for any issues not covered by Homebond.


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*

Yes - that (the owners and/or their insurance company) would be the third level possibility after the developer and _Homebond _(where applicable).


----------



## room305

*Re: Management Companies?*



ClubMan said:


> Then it's up to the management company (often via the agent that they contract) to chase up these legally enforceable debts. The usual reminders, final reminder and solicitor's letter can be required.



It gets very messy. On the one hand you sympathise with people not wanting to pay for a service they have never received. At the same time, you want to get rid of the agent because they are incompetent. The agent can then claim that because some people did not pay fees they were unable to perform their duties. They will also want this money before signing over the company (if we want to employ someone else to do the job).

Then there is nothing to say the entire process won't begin again once we get a new agent in.


----------



## CelloPoint

*Re: Many members act as management company agents !*



ITGuru said:


> I dont think anyone "sane" would buy a 20 year old property for 360K when a new one is available for the same price.



I'm sorry, but I wouldn't go near a new development with a property management company. I would much prefer an older house that's management free than having to put up with letters being dropped through your letterbox demanding extortionate amounts of money and/or nosey idiots with clip-boards appearing on your doorstep telling you what you "have" to do.

Property management fee = 2k pa over 30 year mortgage term = 60k + inflation. So in real terms, you could probably buy a house that's 100k more expensive simply by refusing to purchase a managed property.

Can't remember the exact source, but I seem to remember that a large percentage of new companies recently registered with the CRO are property management company related. One thing's for sure, the directors of property management companies are laughing all the way to the bank.


----------



## prech

*Re: Management Companies?*

My final thought on this is home owners should not be expected to pay mgnt fees (i do not include apts in this) as they pay enough tax, and is not to much to expect LA to look after new estates if you think of the amount of cash govt gets from each house that is built in this country.

The easy exceptance of this double taxation is what scares me the most.


----------



## Guest107

*Re: Management Companies?*



prech said:


> My final thought on this is home owners should not be expected to pay mgnt fees (i do not include apts in this) as they pay enough tax



In principle I agree but for estates there should be a vote to get taken in charge and the  majority should prevail  ...say a 60:40  majority. That vote policy  should have statutory triggers .

You will vote for lower quailty landscaping and cleaning but its a calculated risk that you take yourself .

A bad local authority is better than a bad management agent ANY day.


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*



2Pack said:


> A bad local authority is better than a bad management agent ANY day.


Do you mean *agent *or *company*?!?


----------



## ITGuru

*Confusion with the Management company and Management agent*

 
Still confusion with Management company & Management agent ?  

Do we need to define both terms again !


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*

Perhaps - many people who pontificate about how much of a rip-off this whole area represents often can't distinguish between the two it would seem.


----------



## Guest107

*Re: Management Companies?*



2Pack said:


> A bad local authority is better than a bad management *agent *ANY day.



AGENT means AGENT !

An LA is both MC and MA and has a single point of contact. An MA does not have to deal with owners, merely with an entity 'controlled' in theory anyway by the owners being an MC


----------



## rkeane

*Re: Management Companies?*

If there was no management company would the green areas be kept tidy?  Would there be as much security?  And anythign else these companies supposedly do.  I think that they could.  When I was groing up my Dad took the initiative to get the entire estate to look after the place.  It meant putting a kitty together for someone to come in and cut the grass, they had parades around the estate (seems naff now) and organised a football tournament.  These things were all taken care of by the residents.  It just takes a bit of initiative and from 1 of them.  Getting ripped off by agencies is not the future


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*



rkeane said:


> Getting ripped off by agencies is not the future


Agencies? Agents? Companies?


----------



## rkeane

*Re: Management Companies?*



ClubMan said:


> Agencies? Agents? Companies?


I think you know what I mean.


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Management Companies?*

Not really. Agent or company? If it's the former then the management company of which one is a member/shareholder can deal with any alleged rip-off by ditching the agent and employing another. If it's the latter then the member/shareholder can easily take direct action (e.g. stand for election, mobilise other member/shareholders) to deal with any alleged rip-off on the part of the company which is also circumscribed in its behaviour by _CRO _rules and legislation.

Of course some people won't let the facts get in the way of a good rip-off _Ireland _victimhood claim.


----------



## rkeane

*Re: Management Companies?*



ClubMan said:


> Not really. Agent or company? If it's the former then the management company of which one is a member/shareholder can deal with any alleged rip-off by ditching the agent and employing another. If it's the latter then the member/shareholder can easily take direct action (e.g. stand for election, mobilise other member/shareholders) to deal with any alleged rip-off on the part of the company which is also circumscribed in its behaviour by _CRO _rules and legislation.
> 
> Of course some people won't let the facts get in the way of a good rip-off _Ireland _victimhood claim.


But that has nothing to do with what I said.  Residents for themselves.


----------



## CCOVICH

*Re: Management Companies?*

If we are talking about apartments (which the OP was asking about), or any large scale development, I don't think it is feasible to depend on the residents themselves to run it without: 

(a) a legally binding agreement to pay fees signed by all owners; and 
(b) someone to run the company day-to-day.

Re. (b), if you can summon enough volunteers to ensure fees are collected, negotiate contracts with service providers, field (irate) calls from other owners, send out circulars to owners, organise and run the AGM (certainly not I role I would relish), then fair enough. But doing this for a development of 200-300 apartments (common enough around Dublin these days) on a voluntary basis seems slighly unrealistic IMHO.

The agent's fee is only one part of the overall management fee. Getting rid of agents altogther isn't ideal in the case of large developments IMHO.


----------



## rkeane

*Re: Management Companies?*



CCOVICH said:


> If we are talking about apartments (which the OP was asking about), or any large scale development, I don't think it is feasible to depend on the residents themselves to run it without:
> 
> (a) a legally binding agreement to pay fees signed by all owners; and
> (b) someone to run the company day-to-day.
> 
> Re. (b), if you can summon enough volunteers to ensure fees are collected, negotiate contracts with service providers, field (irate) calls from other owners, send out circulars to owners, organise and run the AGM (certainly not I role I would relish), then fair enough. But doing this for a development of 200-300 apartments (common enough around Dublin these days) on a voluntary basis seems slighly unrealistic IMHO.
> 
> The agent's fee is only one part of the overall management fee. Getting rid of agents altogther isn't ideal in the case of large developments IMHO.


What needs to be done day to day? Its more like on a weekly basis. Plus, when, as I said, someone takes the initiative to show the other residents how much they will be saving, how well the estate will work as a community and the fact that the security they get will be from their neighbours, not a stranger you hardly ever see. When its done liek this, people like to help each other out.


----------



## room305

*Re: Management Companies?*



rkeane said:


> What needs to be done day to day?  Its more like on a weekly basis.  Plus, when, as I said, someone takes the initiative to show the other residents how much they will be saving, how well the estate will work as a community and the fact that the security they get will be from their neighbours, not a stranger you hardly ever see.  When its done liek this, people like to help each other out.



Who is going to volunteer to knock on every door to collect money for public liability insurance? In my parents estate they do everything on a voluntary basis because it is a small settled estate. No need for management companies and everyone takes it in turn to maintain the common areas.

In my own estate I wouldn't dream of even attempting this and there is only about 50 units in the estate.


----------



## rkeane

*Re: Management Companies?*



room305 said:


> Who is going to volunteer to knock on every door to collect money for public liability insurance? In my parents estate they do everything on a voluntary basis because it is a small settled estate. No need for management companies and everyone takes it in turn to maintain the common areas.
> 
> In my own estate I wouldn't dream of even attempting this and there is only about 50 units in the estate.


Nobody needs to know on doors.  They can have weelk or fortnightly meetings.  Or even a bank account number to pay it to.  You migth not dream of doing it because you dont know your neighbours.  I dont know your situation but would you feel more comfortable doing it where you grew up?


----------



## room305

*Re: Management Companies?*



rkeane said:


> Nobody needs to know on doors.  They can have weelk or fortnightly meetings.  Or even a bank account number to pay it to.  You migth not dream of doing it because you dont know your neighbours.  I dont know your situation but would you feel more comfortable doing it where you grew up?



Even with a bank a/c number what do you do if someone doesn't pay? Call around and demand the money? Send them a solicitors letter?

If we are going to build large housing estates and apartment blocks we need to be realistic about how they will be managed.

As I said, where my parents live it is easy for them to do things on a voluntary basis because it is a small settled estate. I don't think a house has even been sold there in over six years. 

In a bigger development it is just not practical to maintain the area in this way and so you either need a LA to do it or a MC and MA.


----------



## rkeane

*Re: Management Companies?*



room305 said:


> Even with a bank a/c number what do you do if someone doesn't pay? Call around and demand the money? Send them a solicitors letter?
> 
> If we are going to build large housing estates and apartment blocks we need to be realistic about how they will be managed.
> 
> As I said, where my parents live it is easy for them to do things on a voluntary basis because it is a small settled estate. I don't think a house has even been sold there in over six years.
> 
> In a bigger development it is just not practical to maintain the area in this way and so you either need a LA to do it or a MC and MA.


The estate my dad did it on had a few hundred houses.  House owners arent kids and are more likely to pay when its saving them money, they are getting a nicer living environment back and often wouldnt want their neighbours to think they are broke.  I think it can work, especially if estates are broken up into smaller sectors.


----------



## CCOVICH

*Re: Management Companies?*



rkeane said:


> What needs to be done day to day? Its more like on a weekly basis. Plus, when, as I said, someone takes the initiative to show the other residents how much they will be saving, how well the estate will work as a community and the fact that the security they get will be from their neighbours, not a stranger you hardly ever see. When its done liek this, people like to help each other out.


 

If you feel it is feasible in a development of 200-300, then fair enough.  I just don't think so myself.


----------



## rkeane

*Re: Management Companies?*



CCOVICH said:


> If you feel it is feasible in a development of 200-300, then fair enough.  I just don't think so myself.


But like I said, it could be cut down to smaller sectors if needed.


----------



## Guest107

*Re: Management Companies?*



room305 said:


> If we are going to build large housing estates and apartment blocks we need to be realistic about how they will be managed.



absolutely correct.

I would think that if there is a gate or a front door its an MC and MA scenario and if not it should be taken in charge in a given number of years.

the reasons we have an MC not an LA in charge of some estates is

1. LAs do not have a _clear_ obligation to take over , ah sure they might in time, maybe , but they are grand sure . 
2. a FUNCTIONING MC can POSSIBLY manage it better, if so surely they can claim some money off the LA towards their expenses ...non ???
3. A property owner can faff around to build on the green areas in future  as has happened by fudging ownership and taking in charge. 
4. The owners in a 60% vote can opt in or out of LA control....and if out they must gate 

The whole issue needs statute law and clarity and pronto , roll in ground rent into that as well. 

But apartment complexes and gated communities should be force to manage themsleves with penalties for opt outers .

Each LA should have a compliance officer ( including their own compliance)


----------



## dilemma

*Re: Management Companies?*

I am considering purchasing a property in a privately managed estate and have a problem I hope someone might be able to help me with. Having been advised of 3 different management fees by the EA, I decided to take the initiative and call the management company who would surely be able to provide transparency re charges and basic services rendered?? Apallingly, I have so far gotten yet two more different yearly rates from the management company and an outright refusal to supply a specimen contract for review by prospective buyer. They have said that they do not hold the lease agreement and I need to contact my solicitor re same. Surely this is 'caveat emptor' gone too far? Surely I do not have to wait until signing day and incur legal fees to discover the rates and terms of what may be a 999-year financial committment. Consumer Agency says technically they are right, but in practice most would provide access to specimen T&Cs for the sake of customer service/ courtesy.  Feel free to PM me any info and thanks in advance!


----------



## PM1234

*Re: Management Companies?*



rkeane said:


> The estate my dad did it on had a few hundred houses. House owners arent kids and are more likely to pay when its saving them money, they are getting a nicer living environment back and often wouldnt want their neighbours to think they are broke. I think it can work, especially if estates are broken up into smaller sectors.


 
Would think your dad must be one of the lucky ones. We're continually getting letters from our management co. advising so many apt owners haven't paid their annual fees and the number of owners they are taking court action against for this. I can't see how neighbours would tackle this, particularly for non owner occupiers.

It is simply unfair that people who comply and pay their fees on time should have to carry those who don't, and without a management company trying to enforce this, the numbers would certainly increase.


----------



## roland

*Re: Many members act as management company agents !*



CelloPoint said:


> Property management fee = 2k pa over 30 year mortgage term = 60k + inflation. So in real terms, you could probably buy a house that's 100k more expensive simply by refusing to purchase a managed property.


 
This is not a valid comparison.  You have 'forgotten' to include all the costs that go with running a house.  The property management fee for an apartment includes your buildings and liability insurance, upkeep of common areas, window cleaning, waste disposal, contribution towards 'major expense' items down the line (replace the roof; replace the lift; painting the exterior walls etc.), and also the cost of someone else doing all this for you.  Now, can you add in what all of these items cost you when you are running a house by yourself?  Then we might have a valid comparison.


----------



## ri_ra

*Re: Management Companies?*

We (a no of residents) were unhappy with our management company directors and the management agent - who was doing nothing. A group of us were elected as the replacement directors. We are doing our best to meet with the management agent - to get details of our current status - receipts, invoices, accounts etc. He keeps avoiding all our calls. What can we do to get him to hand over the 'accounts'.


----------



## aonfocaleile

*Re: Management Companies?*

Ri Ra - in answer to your question, maybe you could consider calling in person to the agents office. Make a pest of yourself until they provide the information.

On a seperate point, the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement are conducting an e-consultation on management companies. The website is www.odce.ie Some of the posters on this site might be interested. The documentation is long but don't let that deter you!


----------

