Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Leaseholders stiffed with the bill over cladding


Recommended Posts

0
HOLA441
  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1
HOLA442
2
HOLA443
3
HOLA444
4
HOLA445
5
HOLA446
6
HOLA447
7
HOLA448
13 hours ago, maverick73 said:

Are the leaseholders allowed to source their own cladding?

Leaseholders are allowed to get together and hire some lawyers to sue the company that stuck firelighters on the outside of their building in the first place.

Note to bail out campaigning politicians. If you're gonna do anything, do this. Make it criminal and you can pursue the directors - people who actually made the decision/did the deed raher than allow them to declare bankrupcy and drive off to their villa in the rolls.

Anyone think our country's systems are broken?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8
HOLA449
19 hours ago, ebull said:

Leaseholders are allowed to get together and hire some lawyers to sue the company that stuck firelighters on the outside of their building in the first place.

Note to bail out campaigning politicians. If you're gonna do anything, do this. Make it criminal and you can pursue the directors - people who actually made the decision/did the deed raher than allow them to declare bankrupcy and drive off to their villa in the rolls.

Anyone think our country's systems are broken?

Very broken, run without morality as everyone chases fiat money ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...
9
HOLA4410
10
HOLA4411

What an unfair, dangerous and unjust situation to find self in, through no fault of own......could buy a nice freehold with that.....even more reason to not buy a leasehold, only good enough to rent short-term, shorter the better....shorted.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11
HOLA4412
1 hour ago, winkie said:

What an unfair, dangerous and unjust situation to find self in, through no fault of own......could buy a nice freehold with that.....even more reason to not buy a leasehold, only good enough to rent short-term, shorter the better....shorted.;)

The list of reasons to avoid leasehold must be as long as War & Peace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12
HOLA4413
13
HOLA4414

Leaseholders should and must be forced to pay for the upkeep of their properties, regardless of cost.

It's clear for anyone to read when buying, that you absolutely have liability for those cost, and you purchase entirely on that understanding. 

If, after firstly paying the charge, you choose to pursue a management company for their negligence, then of course that's your prerogative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14
HOLA4415
15
HOLA4416
1 minute ago, msi said:

Tory Logic: 

1) Leaseholders > Poor > Labour Voters > F**k em

2) Building companies > Rich > Donors > see 1)

Management Company = Rich

Sue them if they believe they'll successfully win the case.

If not, why did they put themselves in the position of paying such an extortionate price knowing they couldn't afford the liabilities?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16
HOLA4417

I once rented a flat from a work mate and he happened to show me details of management charges, minutes of meetings etc.

The "grounds" were a couple of strips of grass and a few shrubs.

Although I can't recall the amounts I do recall being absolutely stunned by the size of the bills for virtually zero effort and what there was had been poorly carried out.  Grass was ok, they couldn't really screw that up.

Management companies are also often lazy and incompetent. From previous experience elsewhere I found getting them to do to their job can be very difficult.

All this makes me think that abuse of leaseholders and associated corruption must be rife throughout the country.

If I had the choice of a leasehold flat to purchase or rent, I'd just rent it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17
HOLA4418
17 minutes ago, Bluestone59 said:

.

If I had the choice of a leasehold flat to purchase or rent, I'd just rent it.

 

Prior to the housing mania, it was much more normal to rent a flat that was part of a block wholly owned by the same landlord. Makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18
HOLA4419
19
HOLA4420
20
HOLA4421
21
HOLA4422
22
HOLA4423
4 minutes ago, longgone said:

surely the responsibility lies with the freeholder of the building ?

....of course......but they will try to get away with it if they can.......wanting all the benefits and none of the disadvantages, passing the buck.....way of the world today.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23
HOLA4424
1 minute ago, longgone said:

why do leases exist then ? what you paying a lease extension for if the building is not owned. 

I'll correct mysel, as i gave you the wrong answer. It depends on the freehold and on the lease. Perhaps a more knowledgeable person can clarify this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24
HOLA4425

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information