This is really a legal question but someone who frequents this group may have knowledge or experience of this issue.

I own a flat (apartment) in a block of nine in London, UK. There are some repairs to the fabric of the building that need to be carried out, the major one being repointing the brickwork on the second floor. There is an area of about 5 square metres where the pointing has obviously come away. Now the maintenance company have said this is not necessary because they have received no complaints about damp. However, I am concerned that if this is neglected this will affect the building. What is the owners' position/power (little I guess) to oblige the maintenance company and the freeholder to carry out maintenance on the fabric of the building?

I am surprised the maintenance company / freeholder are turning down this request. I would have thought they would have wanted to protect their investment in the building and not let it degrade. The normal scenario I would imagine is the freeholder charging for unnecessary work at inflated prices - rather than the leaseholders asking for repair work to be performed.

On Wednesday, 14 February 2018 19:41:55 UTC, wrote:
This is really a legal question but someone who frequents this group may have knowledge or experience of this issue.

I own a flat (apartment) in a block of nine in London, UK. There are some repairs to the fabric of the building that need to be carried out, the major one being repointing the brickwork on the second floor. There is an area of about 5 square metres where the pointing has obviously come away. Now the maintenance company have said this is not necessary because they have received no complaints about damp. However, I am concerned that if this is neglected this will affect the building. What is the owners' position/power (little I guess) to oblige the maintenance company and the freeholder to carry out maintenance on the fabric of the building?

I am surprised the maintenance company / freeholder are turning down this request. I would have thought they would have wanted to protect their investment in the building and not let it degrade. The normal scenario I would imagine is the freeholder charging for unnecessary work at inflated prices - rather than the leaseholders asking for repair work to be performed.

try uk.legal.moderated


NT

On 14/02/18 19:41, wrote:
This is really a legal question but someone who frequents this group may have knowledge or experience of this issue.

I own a flat (apartment) in a block of nine in London, UK. There are some repairs to the fabric of the building that need to be carried out, the major one being repointing the brickwork on the second floor. There is an area of about 5 square metres where the pointing has obviously come away. Now the maintenance company have said this is not necessary because they have received no complaints about damp. However, I am concerned that if this is neglected this will affect the building. What is the owners' position/power (little I guess) to oblige the maintenance company and the freeholder to carry out maintenance on the fabric of the building?

I am surprised the maintenance company / freeholder are turning down this request. I would have thought they would have wanted to protect their investment in the building and not let it degrade. The normal scenario I would imagine is the freeholder charging for unnecessary work at inflated prices - rather than the leaseholders asking for repair work to be performed.


As you note the usual problem is to prevent unnecessary work. In the
thirty years I ran a flat management company the usual problem was
persuading people to pay for repairs.
One increasing problem is the onerous consultation requirements
('section 20') before any repairs can be carried out.
https://www.lease-advice.org/advice-...-other-issues/






--
djc

(–€Ì¿Ä¹Ì¯–€Ì¿ Ì¿)
No low-hanging fruit, just a lot of small berries up a tall tree.

On 14/02/2018 19:41, wrote:
This is really a legal question but someone who frequents this group may have knowledge or experience of this issue.

I own a flat (apartment) in a block of nine in London, UK. There are some repairs to the fabric of the building that need to be carried out, the major one being repointing the brickwork on the second floor. There is an area of about 5 square metres where the pointing has obviously come away. Now the maintenance company have said this is not necessary because they have received no complaints about damp. However, I am concerned that if this is neglected this will affect the building. What is the owners' position/power (little I guess) to oblige the maintenance company and the freeholder to carry out maintenance on the fabric of the building?

I am surprised the maintenance company / freeholder are turning down this request. I would have thought they would have wanted to protect their investment in the building and not let it degrade. The normal scenario I would imagine is the freeholder charging for unnecessary work at inflated prices - rather than the leaseholders asking for repair work to be performed.

Have a read through your lease. That should have a list of obligations
which must be fulfilled by the Landlord. See how this re-pointing work
would fit within that.

I presume that you have to pay an annual maintenance charge to the
Landlord. Is that fairly constant, or does it vary from year to year
depending on what the actual repair costs have been each year?
Presumably if this work is done, you and the the other flat owners will
have to share the cost of it in one way or another?

But if it's *not* done, it could affect the market value of your flat if
and when you wish to sell your lease. If you can find a way of getting
it done, it will prevent water ingress and general deterioration which
will otherwise occur.

I own a flat in a Georgian house which has been converted into six
apartments. We're in the fortunate position where the six flat owners
collectively own the freehold, and are the shareholders in the
management company. We try to plan 5 years ahead and set the maintenance
charge at a level which will cope with year to year fluctuations, and
the fact that some major expenses like external decoration only come
round once every few years. We would still try to deal with ad-hoc
repairs like re-pointing in a timely fashion rather than waiting for
problems to become more serious.
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.