The Right-to-Manage
The Right-to-Manage has become a very popular phrase on TheTruthAboutSolitaire, but what is it and why do many of the property management agents not advise you of this option?
Well, to answer the later part of the question, we believe it is to ensure that they keep your business and my honest opinion is, any property management company that actually tells you about this, is worth speaking to!
Having looked at many property management company’s websites and it will not be a surprise to any of you that, none of the Consensus Business Group management agents (Solitaire, Peverel, County Estates Management, etc..) display any information relating to Right to Manage.
Why is that? Andy, maybe you could answer that for us?
For those of you that aren’t aware, what Right to Manage is, RTM allows leaseholders to gain control of the management of their block from ineffective landlords without requiring any consents or court orders.
• Allows the replacement of under-performing managers.
• Helps maintain standards and ensures competitive pricing and continued value for money.
• Gives the lessees full control over the decision-making process relating to the running of the development.
• Decision making, such as the placement of the Buildings Insurance, engagement of contractors and level of service charge will now be firmly in the lessees control.
When the Government introduced the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 it provided leaseholders with a right to take control of the management of their building. This process is known as the ‘Right to Manage’ (RTM) and is open to all owners of private leasehold flats subject to a few perfectly reasonable criteria.
There are in excess of one and a half million flat leaseholders in the UK. The majority of leaseholders do not own their freehold and have little control over the management of their building. Unwarranted loading of leaseholder service charges is a widespread and common problem. There are other legal processes available to provide redress for unreasonable charging but these are time consuming and few go to the leasehold valuation tribunal to seek redress.
Unsurprisingly most leaseholders of private residential flats are interested in having a direct say in how their building is managed, in reducing their service charges and in making the managing agent accountable to them and this is where Right to Manage is required.
Hopefully this information has helped to explain what Right to Manage is.
June 19th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
Some developments appear to be more complex than others when pursuing the right to manage and this is largely down to how the buildings are structured. For instance; there are five flats and five houses sharing a common (managed) parking area which also has access to garages for the houses. The houses and flats are all charged for the parking area but at different rates. Because of this arrangement, several RTM companies would have to be set up to release all the properties from Solitaire’s management.
I can’t help but wonder if the developers are in cahoots with Consensus and actually developing properties in such a way to make pursuing RTM too onerous and too expensive for residents, thus ensuring part of the Consensus group’s income.
Paranoid? Possibly. But hardly surprising given the history with Solitaire.
June 19th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
Kate – I share your suspicions. But I think it’s mainly a symptom of developers trying to pack as many dwellings into as small an area as possible, to maximise their profits, rather than a ploy to ensure the future revenues of property management companies. This “stack ‘em high” approach results in many more shared areas and rights of access between neighbouring freehold and leasehold plots, which can complicate matters when setting up a RTM company.
One solution, whilst initially expensive, would be for leaseholders to set up a RTM company managing their properties. Then the RTM comany could purchase the freehold to these ‘grey areas’, and charge the freeholders ground rent and a service/maintenance charge for use of any garages / parking spaces built on these ‘grey areas’. Alternatively, particularly if we’re talking freestanding, detached brick built garages, the freeholders could be encouraged to purchase the freehold to their garages and simply contribute a % towards the total cost of maintaining the shared parking area.
It’s a bit of faff, but I imagine most freeholders in this situation would rather pay a reasonable fee to their neighbours, on whose land on their garage is built or parking space is situated, than to a faceless property management company.
June 19th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
Jon, that makes a lot of sense, I’m sure you’re right.
Although the ideal solution to the whole problem of property management, buying a freehold is a huge undertaking and the vast majority of residents I’m sure would be loathe to do so especially in the current climate even given the size of the longer term gains. As far as I know, the houses on the development in question do already own the freehold to their garages, but not their parking spaces and the access to the same. This would appear to complicate matters further, although I haven’t looked into this enough to determine whats what just yet.
Apart from RTM and buying a freehold, Do you know if legislation currently allows for any interested parties, i.e. residents, to become members on the property management board to influence decisions made and determine that costs stay reasonable? If this isn’t already the case, then surely it would be a way to avoid the over charging/under servicing culture that seems to exist presently?
June 23rd, 2009 at 2:02 pm
Kate,
If I have read your question correctly, I don’t know of any specific leglislation, that would allow non-interested parties to sit on the board of directors of a RTM company, or vice versa, for an RTM company to have a direct say regarding the management of neighbouring freehold properties.
I think it’s more a case of organising your own interests by RTM, then as a group approaching any neighbouring freeholders / residents associations regarding any issues that affect both the freeholders and leaseholders. This isn’t going so far as buying the freehold to shared access areas, but would keep all interested parties in the loop. A solicitor could then draft an agreement between the RTM company and the freeholders regarding the shared access areas, which all parties could sign.
There may be a quicker / easier way to do this – any property lawyers reading this with any suggestions?
Jon
June 26th, 2009 at 8:33 am
On the 11th June under the heading ‘It’s not all about the negatives of Solitaire’ I posted a question/suggestion to Andy about Solitair’s scheduled visits to our respective developments.
Two weeks have passed and there has been no response and so, for the second time;
Andy, is there any reason why customers cannot be informed of dates and times of scheduled visits to our respective developments ? I assume that such visits are planned in advance and as such it would be easy to inform us of the dates of scheduled visits by placing a note in the envelopes along with our periodic bills. An alternative would be to place the information on this website or the Solitaire website.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:37 am
A n onymous
I expect the reason they dont advise of visits, is because they are worried about confrontation of unhappy residents.
We had visitors looking at the stairwells and surrounding areas yesterday and I can only assume that it was Solitaire.
If it was, you’d have thought they would have contacted residents to advise of the visit, so that we could for once have a face-to-face chat with them.
Especially when we have requested E&M replace them with a local company. I’ve a great papertrail for everyone to read once E&M give us an answer that I’ll post publicly for everyone to see.
Makes very interesting reading.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:51 am
Sheps – am I right in thinking you are in Bristol (or somewhere near)…??? If so, then yes, you probably did have a visit from Solitaire yesterday. Was it 2 ladies and 1 gentleman? They visited my development in Cheltenham yesterday morning – I just happened to arrive home from a trip into town to find them walking around my development – I’ve been trying to establish when the Property Manager would next be visiting, and wasn’t aware of his visit yesterday (accompanied by his assistant, and his boss). I spoke to them, and they advised that they were doing a tour of the area, so I guess they could well have been heading in the Bristol direction…..
As Sheps suggests (and I agree), they keep site visits quiet to avoid potential confrontations with residents – if I had arrived home 5 minutes later yesterday, I would have missed them, and not have known they’d even visited.
It was good to see that people from head office are getting out & about as well, and therefore hopefully are now also understanding the issues on their developments, and realising that the complaints from residents are justified. Whether it will actually help to get things done remains to be seen…..
June 26th, 2009 at 11:26 am
In English this time (sorry)
Well Andy ,
I said i was optimistic about recent communications and true to form Solitaire once again prove incapable. The new code given for the “repaired” bin store doesnt work, so having convinced residents they should not just break into it they have all piled their stinking rubbish by the doors and called Solitaire to let them know. Did anybody come out this week NO, did the cleaner just ignore it YES; its a bloody joke and a health hazard, it stinks and there is rubbish blowing everywhere. A resident asked me if the fire alarm works and when it was tested last – I told him to ask you!!! As for the deep clean of the porch and the cleaning of the light fittings – well I can only presume the cleaner is a one armed blind man!!!
So to all contributors to TTAS, I am sad to inform you that my earlier optimism was totally misguided
June 26th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Matt..
I am in Bristol and I only saw quite a small woman and a guy in combats / grey workwear going round the place.
Best bit was, I overheard the woman say when they were in my stairwell “we get all the aggro from this block”.
Nice customer service I thought!! Nothing like knocking on my door and introducing themselves, considering all the ‘aggro’ they get from me.
June 26th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Jon, no, sorry I didn’t explain myself clearly. I was wondering if there is any legislation that says any leaseholder can sit on the board of the company that property manages the property in which the resident leases.
This would surely solve many of the problems without having to resort to the complex and at times costly, RTM process.
June 26th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
Isn’t it strange how all the contributors seems to add at the same time? And always in response to the same few bloggers? Someone must be a busy boy…
Service = better
site vists = better
accounts = more accurate (at last)
straightforward payments line,
senior people with a clue what they are talking about
it’s easy to complain but Peverel’s improvements are vast…do we need to find a new hobby?
June 28th, 2009 at 8:47 am
I would like to comment on Brian’s post of 26th June regarding fire alarms.
A year or so ago a person died as a result of a fire in a London flat – the fire was due to breaches of fire regulations by the landlord. The landlord, Mr Mehmat Parlak was jailed for four years and his company, Watchacre Properties Ltd were fined £21,000.
I understand it was the Fire Service that took him/them to court.
If you are worried abour fire safety issues why not ask your local Fire Service to come and inspect.
An article on this incident can be found on the ‘news on the block’
website and by then searching for ‘first landlord jailed over fire safety’. Maybe admin can set up a link.
June 28th, 2009 at 10:58 am
See also the separate article called “Managing Agents Now Accountable For Fire Safety”, also on the “News On The Block” website.
Irrespective of legislation, the landlord of a building and/or their managing agents surely have a duty of care to make sure their property (and it’s residents…) are protected to the best of it’s abilities. If a fire alarm is fitted, it should be maintained in full working order, and checked / serviced / repaired on a regular basis.
The death & subsequent prosecution (and prison sentence…..) as noted above is a lesson not to be ignored.
If you’ve got a fire alarm in your building, find out whether it works, and when it was last tested (I’m sure testing should be done annually). If there’s a problem, get onto Solitaire (or whoever your managing agent is) and pester them constantly to get the problem/s fixed, or otherwise contact your local Fire Service. If you’ve only got extinguishers, find out when they were last serviced – there should be a sticker / label on them to confirm this. Again, I’m sure extinguishers should be checked annually, and (I believe) it’s the landlord’s responsibility to do this.
I don’t have a fire alarm in my development, but Brian’s comments about the state of the alarm where he lives is very concerning – I agree with “a n onymous” about going directly to your local Fire Service if your landlord / managing agent fail to deal with the repair / maintenance / testing of a fire alarm installation. If I did have an alarm in my block (we haven’t even got any extinguishers…) and found it wasn’t working, I would at first contact the management company and INSIST that they get it fixed immediately, or otherwise go straight to the Fire Service within a couple of days.
It might sound melodramatic, but potentially it’s your life we’re talking about here…..
June 30th, 2009 at 11:57 am
Matt
I have pushed this back to Solitaire by writing to them and making it clear that the responsibility for the alarm and alarm testing is theirs. Further I informed my propoerty manager that as I have told her personally about the issue, it is my understanding that she could face a “corporate manslughter” charge in the event of a fatality caused in part by a non-operational fire alarm system. I have also written to Cheshire Fire Service. As a landlord I am not in a position to test the alrams and fire extinguishers etc – this is what I pay a management fee for, but i think it is important that you document your concerns to Solitaire to safeguard yourself.
Phil
Trust me this isn’t a hobby, its a pain. If I am fortunate enough to enjoy the “vast improvements” in service that you “apparently” enjoy , then I won’t need to post anything. Is your lunch time at Peverel over now?
June 30th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
Brian – you are doing all you can then, it seems. The ball is firmly back in Solitaire’s court to get the alarm working, and it will be on their heads if (heaven forbid) anything should happen whilst the alarm is not working properly.
“Admin” now have a new posting in relation to Health & Safety issues, and Solitaire’s responsibilities. Yes we are all annoyed (apart, it seems, from “Phil”…) at the issues with management, general maintenance, invoicing etc, but Health & Safety should take priority over all of these, as – potentially – it is our lives at stake.
Perhaps “Andy” could advise on the standard procedure when a report of a problem with a fire alarm (or other high-risk item) is reported by a resident to Solitaire. If there is a procedure, it seems to have failed, as Brian’s alarm system woes seem to demonstrate.
If this was a public building and the fire brigade did an inspection and found that the alarm wasn’t working, they could close the building immediately, or set a time limit for repairs to be made before re-visiting (with the threat of closure). Why then do Solitaire seem to not deal with non-functioning alarm systems – it’s there for a reason, not because the big shiny red bell on the wall looks nice…..
Keep on to them Brian – as you state, you pay a management fee for such things to be done on your behalf.
August 4th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
Hi,I have lived in my freehold property for 8 yrs. Their are 39 properties on the estate. We have had nothing but trouble since day one. We have now decided to set up our own management of the estate. We are having a meeting on Thursday night. I am trying to find where we stand legaly. Can anyone help. I think wa can give notice to Solitaire as long as we have 50% of residents agree.
Thanks
Mandi