Snookered with management fee/agent

[spider7]

Hi,
I'm in a bit of tricky situation.
I bought a first floor apartment 2 years ago.
The block has around 30 units with only 4 or 5 occupied
The development is nearly finished but not quite - external parking, landscaping and external lighting, finishes etc. not fully carried out
The management fees are €1600 p.a. demanded by the managing agent. ( I have been paying this reluctantly)
Weirdly the managing agent does not look after the grounds of the property. He has sub-contracted these to the developer of the block who also lives on the ground floor of the block.
No management company has been set up as only a couple of units have been sold.
The management fees are heavily skewed against those living above ground floor (500 for those on ground floor against 1600 for those above ground floor)
Basically I am paying 1600 for the very basics - rubbish collection, lift maintenance, insurance and cursory cleaning of the entrance lobby and electricity of common areas.
As there is no management company I have no recourse.
I had to demand an AGM last year as none was offered by the managing agent. The meeting and items discussed was such a joke.
Basically I need advice on what I should do as I feel like I am being ripped off big time.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Sunny]

There has to be a management company even if the developer controls it. Who owns the common areas?

 

[purpeller]

This sounds like a terrible situation.

Could you get together with the other owner-occupiers to see if you can do something about it?

Does your lease actually skew the management fees that way? I've never heard of allocation like that. Does the top floor have higher fees to cover the roof too? Are the ground floor units own door with no use of the common areas?

If you're not already familiar with the whole legal setup, you should do so. Take a look at the new legislation as well as your mngt co. memos & articles of incorporation - even if the developer is in charge, this has to exist.

 

[onq]

The leases seem to favour the developer.
Allow me to make a few assumptions and ask questions:

• If the grounds are not complete, how is he providing a service?
• Why is the management company not pursuing the developer to complet the scheme?
• As anyone approached the local authority to put pressure on the developer to complete?
• Is the developer abusing his dominant position in terms of either voting rights or setting up the leases like this?
• Has anyone approached the Fire Officer, if the escape rotues from the building are not complete and offering a level approach?
• Has anyone approached the Health and Safety Authority about leaving the complex in a dangerous and unsafe condition, if this is indeed the case?

Take good legal advice in relation to all of this before you make a move, because it could all end in tears.
Also who is marketing the scheme and why aren't the rest of teh units sold - are they compete and certified?

Just because we are in a recession you don't let standards slip or let developers off not mitigating their loss.
Is the guy in the ground floor who is paying less than a third of your annual fee is simply sitting on the rest of the units?
Is he in fact waiting for the economy to recover because of the way the finance and prospective ROI [return on investment] is structured.

There is a lot to look into there.
Tell us how you get on.

ONQ.

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be taken.
Competent legal professionals should be asked to advise in Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at hand.