Fleecehold

[EvilRob]

Here's the thing, these exist because the council did not agree to take over the costs of the roads, lighting, whatever so the road is basically private and it is completely impossible to get 50 households to pay up for maintenance on demand.

Thus the necessary evil. Is it more evil than necessary? Maybe.

It's not a necessary evil, it's a complete ripoff. The council should not be approving planning permission for developments they are not willing to adopt. Unless of course they are waiving council tax for you all.

 

[Werewolf]

Actually the piece makes a good point.

The council refuses to take up the new build area management hence the management companies existing to do the necessary.

BUT AM I SEEING LOWER COUNCIL TAX?

The hell I am.

IIRC it has pretty much normally been the way that the development company was responsible for the new build roads etc for a period of time (something like 10-15 years IIRC), I think as a way to help ensure the quality of the infrastructure was up to standard and that the council didn't get lumped with having to completely redo the paths and roads a couple of years after the last property was sold. Otherwise you end up with the likely scenario of developers taking millions in extra profit and leaving the councils with huge bills to basically redo work that only just lasted long enough to sell the last house.

The exception being where the council was one of the developers.

From memory the road I'm on was "adopted" by the council after about ten years and that was the standard practice, at least in the 60's and 70's.

However it is worth noting that the share of the council tax taken up by things like maintaining the grass and streetlights of a road is going to be tiny compared to the other services they have to provide, IIRC around my way we get the hedges cut by the council maybe once or twice a year, and the grass cut maybe 6-8 times a year.

 

[Mekrel]

Seems easier to read an image, get perplexed and make a reply.
but thanks for the advice.

Why not just reply to every thread/post with "google it" then we can close the forum and end all social interaction once and for all

Sinking funds, at least for flats, are accruals of money built up over time to eventually pay for redecorating of the internal and external communal areas. They're also probably dipped into for unforseen expenditure, rather than having to go and ask for more money from leaseholders.

Separately, another complete scam with my previous leasehold flat was paying for a fire risk assessment each year. This isn't to be confused with fire equipment testing, that was another separate charge (and definitely needed). The FRA basically gives you guidance in the event of a fire, something you're already furnished with when you buy the flat and unless the building miraculously changes size/shape/materials it's built with, it isn't required to be carried out annually.

However we were paying for it to be re-done every year and the response to challenging it was basically "Grenfell innit". Despite the fact our 7 flat, three storey building with no cladding wasn't anything like Grenfell.

 

[jpaul]

The council should not be approving planning permission for developments they are not willing to adopt

on the sewerage side - can well be that the position(height) of the development may preclude connecting it into mains sewerage without additional pumps (and who should pay for them)
Similar to the governments stupid high speed broadband for all policy - really ? irrespective of the wiring-in cost, or, for that matter, delivering post.

------------------------

on the back of todays water company sewerage dumping 're-revelation' - had heard of cornish folks with sceptic tanks that couldn't be emptied because the treatment works had no spare capacity.

 

[Skynet5]

Setup your own management company and run it yourself.

I think that is actually more than possible.

If your block has people with brains, you’re golden.

Hard work. Perhaps not obvious. But possible.

 

[koolpc]

People are bonkers buying a house with the service costs etc...

 

[jpaul]

more ignorance

not sure what happened with enaction of beneath law, for resolving sewerage issues -
The private sewers transfer regulationsProvisional non-statutory guidance on private sewers transferregulationsJune 2011

For private sewers, evidence from survey work and consultation indicates that
the current situation, in which a large number of customers of sewerage
undertakers are disadvantaged by their responsibility for private sewers, is
unfair. These customers are not only paying their water and sewerage
companies for sewerage services, but are also responsible for the upkeep of
the private sewers serving their properties. They are, in effect, paying twice for
their sewer service, and in doing so are effectively subsidising all those who
are not served by private sewers.

2. On 1 October 2011 all privately owned sewers and lateral drains whichcommunicate with (that is drain to) an existing public sewer as at 1 July 2011will become the responsibility of the sewerage undertaker – normally thewater and sewerage company for the area. This includes private sewers

...
3. Private pumping stations which form part of the drainage arrangementsand which are on pipework that transfers on 1 October will transfer later.Such pumping stations will transfer between 1 October 2011 and 1 October2016, with all pumping stations that have not been transferred before thentransferring on 1 October 2016. The Government expects that sewerageundertakers will wish to consider drawing up works programmes to achieve aprogressive transfer of pumping stations over this 5 year period. Pipeworkupstream of a pumping station will transfer on 1 October 2011

 

[EvilRob]

on the sewerage side - can well be that the position(height) of the development may preclude connecting it into mains sewerage without additional pumps (and who should pay for them)

Get the developer to pay a lump sum that the council can invest to pay for it (or **** away) but don't set up residents to be screwed over for decades.

 

[Steeps]

Try mixing this with shared ownership. Double layer lease with two sets of incompetent management companies. I had a look at the information pack for a non shared ownership flat in the same block as mine, their ground rent and service charges were double what mine were so either I'm on to a better thing (can't say good thing as its still crap) or I'm about to get screwed over in a few years when the bill finally catches up.

 

[arknor]

Heres what I get fleeced for in a flat, I'm just renting but these are the extra charges, some people own their apartments though.

only just realised how expensive communal cleaning is... x52 = like 450 a year, we must be paying like 22.5k or something a year WTF.... that could have a guy on minimum wage doing a 9-5?
they don't only do cleaning though and other charges are also going towards the wages, and theres like 10 blocks here they only have like 5 people doing them all
my block gets cleaned twice a week and they do the minimum, takes about an hour

Admin charge for communal services 3.22
Communal cleaning 8.64 (thats a lot of money each person is paying)
Responsive repairs 0.94
fire 1.60
H&S compliance 0.88
Ground maint/landscaping 2.47 (people with leaf blowers once in a blue moon, they originally had machines for hoovering the road/parking lot but not seen them in years)
lift breakdown cover 3.15
communal light and power 3.37
communal refuse disposal 1.14 (shouldnt this be part of the communal cleaning...)
salt provision 0.03 (never seen any bins for salt)
site security 0.32 (CCTV cameras that might not even be real and if they are then 20+ y ears old)
tree surveys and associated costs 0.18
TV signal enhancing equip 0.06 (this obsolete by now?)
Window cleaning 0.12 (they don't clean any windows anywhere....)

Bins emptied every week
Those little council sweeper vans still do the carpark, The council was trying to put parking permits on the street not long ago.... I told them it's not even adopted..... They sent surveys out, had a map marked out etc.. must have spent a fortune....

It makes me think its not even the council pushing it, but the 3rd party who was sending out the surveys.. they probably look at a map and badger the council about how much money they could be making.

it was a one man operation too judging from the crap website they had... like geocities esq

 

[dowie]

All we really see for this is the lawns on the very front of the estate are cut around 20 times per year, and the waste water pump is serviced.

In theory, you could all buy the freehold and manage it yourself, or indeed without buying the freehold you could invoke the right to self-manage or appoint a management company of your choosing and sign off on what costs you want to have.

Basically that involves the residents acting as company directors, 2.5k split 35 ways for the management co isn't that much to avoid the faff of making sure some gardeners and the other bills are paid and make sure everyone pays their share. If you all really really wanted to then under self-management you don't necessarily need a management company(or rather agency), you could have the residents run your management company and pay the gardeners and contract for the waste pump etc.. directly or even sack the gardeners and take it in turns to mow the grass yourselves.

I wonder if there are some planning-related shenanigans here - has the road been handed over to the local council? If so presumably the grass verges haven't or you have some communal green that hasn't been handed over - ordinarily with freehold housing if you live in a close with a patch of grass in the middle the council not only owns the roads but will send someone to do the gardening for you, ditto to grass verges or management of trees on the street if present.

Likewise, that water thing is a faff - ordinarily there ought to just be a connection to the mains and sewage and a bill between you and the water company but there seems to be some sort of communal thing as you'd get with a block of flats. Ditto to the electricity - is there some entrance to your estate with some fancy lighting or have the pavements and lamposts on the street not been handed over to the council too ergo you're left paying the bill - again something freehold property owners (other than those on say private roads) typically don't have an issue with as the council normal deals with street lighting.

Lots of this stuff is standard with apartments as it has to be communal (lightning, communal water charge, issues with water pumps requiring maintenance contracts), we even have to pay extra for rubbish collection too (even though people usually have that as part of their council tax) - on the plus side I don't need to worry about over-filling a wheely bin as I've got a couple of bin stores each with several big Biffa bins in the carpark that I can fill with multiple bins worth of stuff if I ever need to. But it is a bit of a scam when new housing estates are developed and sold as leasehold and with a management co though as most of this could be avoided.

 

[dazzerd]

On this what we did a few years back when the management company started to take the **** was take responsibility for 80% of the jobs that go with it. We sign off costs, we determine who does the gardening etc etc. The only thing the management company do is the legal admin and billing admin. Our costs have now been steady at around 300 squid a year.

 

[MatsyLR]

One of my requirements when moving last year was no Estate fees as it can just spiral out of control.
Managed to get a house built in 2017 that was just before the council stopped adopting roads.

 

[mid_gen]

Not sure if this is a GD type thread, or if it would be better served in home and garden..

This seems to be getting a bit more traction lately, with it possibly being included in the leasehold bill that going through parliament at the moment. It's something that we're tangled up with at the moment, yes I knew it was there when we purchased our home, however within 3 years it's spiralled already. Our smallish new build estate of freehold 35 homes requires a management company with annual fees. Initially these were £100/year, 3 years on and we're not at £383/year with an outstanding bill for works faults with the streets waste water pump at around £15k to be split between properties. It seems that it's quite a widespread thing for new build properties of the last 5 years. Is anyone else feeling the pain of it all?

This is the breakdown of our current annual costs...



All we really see for this is the lawns on the very front of the estate are cut around 20 times per year, and the waste water pump is serviced.

For reference, a BBC of article from today:
Housing estate 'fleeceholds' the next great scandal, Tory peer warns

Such an obvious scam and amazing it's legal. Privatise housing estates, what could go wrong!

Frankly anyone signing up to buy a property with one of these leaseholds where they are obliged to pay a charge that can be arbitrarily increased at any time is absolutely mental, economically illiterate really, but people do it because it's been normalised. The whole concept needs burning to the ground along with this rotten government.

 

[Yaayuh!]

Who's buying into these?!
Is it a case of ignorance or no choice? It's been awful for decades and only getting worse.

 

[ahar]

I live in an estate like this and what @dowie said is correct. The estate is not adopted by the council which means we have to pay for maintenance of roads, verges etc. But it also means when the council gave planning permission for a new development next to us and tried to force a road connection between the two (making our estate a potential rat run), we could tell them to go away and make love to their mothers.

We also have to pay for the waste water pump - never quite sure why the water company refused that, but at least when it stops working it gets fixed immediately as we're responsible for it.

Sinking fund is super important- it's essentially putting money away for a rainy day.

The one thing I like about the management company (we have the option to do this ourselves, but i dont trust many on the estate to do a good job) is the threats of legal action to the idiots who live in the estate who think they can avoid the maintenance payments. Lots of wailing and whinging on the WhatsApp group but they do pay up in the end.

Oh, estate is around 60 houses and a small block of 10 social rent flats. We pay around £350 a year. Everything is freehold.

 

[200sols]

Who's buying into these?!
Is it a case of ignorance or no choice? It's been awful for decades and only getting worse.

Most newbulds come with these charges, its just another symptom of a broken system. What probably started as a 'good idea' quickly turns into a nightmare, sure maintaining the grounds for £200 a year? Sounds good. Until they realised they could milk people for thousands of course.

These houses are freehold as well, dont confuse this with leaseholds.

 

[jeffk]

In theory, you could all buy the freehold and manage it yourself, or indeed without buying the freehold you could invoke the right to self-manage or appoint a management company of your choosing and sign off on what costs you want to have.

I used to live in a block where the leaseholders exercised their right to manage. Unfortunately, the only leaseholders who had the time and energy to get involved with the running of the block were a handful of awful buy-to-let landlords who each owned multiple flats in the block. They went too far the other way and let the block fall into complete disrepair, and then had a major falling out with each other. While it was fun watching the fireworks (they really were a bunch of greedy, pompous ****heads), I’d vote against self-management if I ever ended up in that situation again.

 

[slinxy]

Most new builds are fleacehold now a day, I'm currently living in one and when I was looking around anything that was less than 10 years old was a fleecehold.

I'm currently paying a lease fee per year which is set to double every 25 years I think... it's at £200 pounds at the moment and I'll be dead or moved out by the time it's at £800.
I also pay a monthly maintenance charge, every year I have this debate with the maintenance company in what I should actually be charged for. The issue is that the same maintenance company is looking after sereval blocks appartments in the area and the manager can't understand that I shouldn't be paying for services like tree maintenance as no one mainten my trees nor should I be paying for cleaners, so it takes serveal letters for them to get my bill right. I seems that the new manager understands and my bill was actually less than what I paid last year.

I have spoken to the maintenance company not the fleacehold management company as they want to charge me £60 for everything... and even if I was to buy the leasehold off the current owners, part of the new contract would be for a maintenance company to be involved in the maintenance of the surrounding area.

I'm looking to pay off the house first and then look at buying the leasehouse or renewling under the new laws so that I don't have to pay any lease hold fees.

 

[BUDFORCE]

Not all leases are bad. The ones where houses have been converted into flats, usually one up one down in a terraced house etc tend to be ok.

Usually they have very long leases and other than the main front door and very small entrance hall no real communal areas