Management Company Accusations

[Bronte]

the management company issued a letter blaming the non-collection of bins on non-payments of fees. The bin area was like rubbish mountain, very unhygenic although the snow was a welcome deterrant to flies and smell.
The bin-men couldnt access the area due to the snow and ice but they did wheel down two extra wheelie bins to throw rubbish into but this was far from adequate.


(You're right that it has nothing to do with me but could you imagine a world where people didnt care about what went on around them?? )

Well it's quite clear in your estate that there are a lot of people that don't care about what goes on around them. Those that don't pay the fees, those that left out rubbish where there were no bins and the people in the estate that didn't get out their shovels and dig a way for the binmen to get access to the bins.

 

[redfedora]

In the initial post you'll see that the management company issued a letter blaming the non-collection of bins on non-payments of fees.

was that addressed to you by name, the landlord by name or "the owner"?

It seemed to me that the Management Company/Agent was using this as an excuse to flag the non-payment of fees by disgruntled property owners. I thought this was a little underhanded.

or they just don't have the money, you have to realise that out of the fee comes things like block insurance (probably top priority) lift mainteance if required, the health and safety like fire equipment and fire alarms etc then waste, landscaping, internal common area cleaning, agent fees, window cleaning, gutter cleaning, building maintenance, the list is endless depending on the type of development.

so maybe near the end of the financial year they didn't have a pot to p in and every cent was gone. I'm a director of a managemnt company and it takes something like 50 - 60K a month to run the place without paying long time creditors, our budget is over 500K (100K sink fund) a year and less than half shareholders pay any fee never mind small amounts and they they all think that 200K will cover 450Ks worth of expenses. those maths just dont add up at soome point services must be cut

You're right that it has nothing to do with me but could you imagine a world where people didnt care about what went on around them??

there's nothing wrong with being concerned about waste not being collected, grass not cut and other stuff you'd expect as a tenant. I'm curious that you've managed to get access to company financial material ie the current financial position and why a landlord or agent discussed it with you.

to be honest if i was a tenant i'd only be concerned that what i was entitled to was done and i'd hassle my landlord to get it done. bins not collected? couldnt care less as a tenant about the MC, i'd just tell my landlord " i pay my rent in full and on time, i expect my bins gone" if he comes back with guff about the MC i'd tell him thats his problem that i pay my rent on time and want my bins collected, let him deal with teh MC

 

[redbhoy]

Well it's quite clear in your estate that there are a lot of people that don't care about what goes on around them. Those that don't pay the fees, those that left out rubbish where there were no bins and the people in the estate that didn't get out their shovels and dig a way for the binmen to get access to the bins.

The estate is designed so that no-one gives a rats about what goes on around them. Theres a good distance between the bins and the main road for people to be out clearing snow.

 

[redbhoy]

Redfedora,

People that paid their fees were leaving the rubbish outside the bin area. Im only a tenant but I do have ears and overheard the stuff to do with the management companies AGM. I didnt hear specific details.

(By initial post, I meant the first post on the top of this thread not actual letter post)

RB

 

[shesells]

I spoke to the data protection office about publishing the names of defaulting shareholders in the past they told me it was in breach of teh data protection act as its personal information.

When i then asked is it then unlawful for any company to list its creditors a debtors to shareholders or was it just specific to management companies and i was told that they would no longer communicate on teh matter and that they had made their position clear and if a company was reported for doing it that this is the view they would take.

The whole problem with management company law prior to the MUD was that it didn't exist. All companies are treated the same at the mo.

A company is entitled to list the units that are not paying. Any member of the MC is entitled to a list of names of other members of the MC. Putting two and two together isn't difficult.

 

[redfedora]

A company is entitled to list the units that are not paying. Any member of the MC is entitled to a list of names of other members of the MC. Putting two and two together isn't difficult.

that's what i thought but but their account information ie outstanding balance is to my undersdtanding private and so cant be shared. if you list balance and address though the name isnt listed the address is personally identifiable info and so it would be a breach of the DPA. like wise if you used a tennant ref and listed that with the amount then that ref is again personally identifiable info. its a no win situation.


its a little strange to be honest. I mean if i was a shareholder in say ANother company then i'd more than likely be allowed to know what was owed to the company and by who so in theory the same rules should apply to shareholders an any company. I tink the DPA just got swamped by complaints by people that refused to pay and were named and shamed at AGMs and they decided point blank that any similiar behavior would be a breach to make life easier on them. yet if somene gets a judgement against them they can be published in the stubbs, but to me that's a public document and would breach data protection but according to teh DPA its not actually a breach, something to do with the fact there is judgement where as a list supplied or displayed at AGM to shareholders is an internal company communication.

I guess you could alwas weigh up the likelihood of someone reporting you and the possible fine with the effect listing them would have ie increasing cashflow and embarrasing people into paying.

most of the hardline defaulters know that in general the company doesn't have extra cash to waste on lawyers and legal fees and even if it went to court they cry poverty and chances are are allowed to drip pay over years.

@ redbhoy ah overhearing that makes sense didn't hear of that. I know how scummy owners can be about bins its the same in my place they just throw crap everywhere i had one just lump stuff like broken kitched swing lid bns, parts of furniture and bedding off a balchony to the grass area leave it all there for hours and them put it all on the floor of the bin shed even though the bins are not for that type of waste. we've had TVs, Microwaves, office chairs, ironing boards and god knows what else thrown into green recycle bins for god sake

 

[markpb]

its a little strange to be honest. I mean if i was a shareholder in say ANother company then i'd more than likely be allowed to know what was owed to the company and by who so in theory the same rules should apply to shareholders an any company. I tink the DPA just got swamped by complaints by people that refused to pay and were named and shamed at AGMs and they decided point blank that any similiar behavior would be a breach to make life easier on them.

There's always the possibility that the DPC are wrong in this case. They're not allowed make up rules or exceptions or change the rules, they're allowed to enforce the law through the courts. They might believe that publishing delinquent unit numbers is a breach of the DPA, ODCE believe otherwise and until it goes to a court of record, there is no right or wrong answer, just peoples opinions.

 

[redfedora]

There's always the possibility that the DPC are wrong in this case. .

Personally i believe they are wrong and are covering their collective asses.

I mean how can it be wrong for a company to circulate such info in what would be considered an internal company notification and yet if someone has a judgement against them for debt in court it published in a public circulation ie the stubbs. it baffles me.

One thing we're considering is having a debtors list availible at AGM that can't be removed from the room but can be viewed by all people present on the night.

 

[Yorrick]

(You're right that it has nothing to do with me but could you imagine a world where people didnt care about what went on around them?? )

You mean a world where people mind their own business