Floorboards in Property

[MM32]

Help!

We own a rental ground floor flat which we lived in for 3 years and have rented for 1 year. We own a share of the freehold with 9 other flats. The building is run by the freeholders rather than a managing company and until we moved out we were v.mucn involved with this, my partner being treasurer for example.

From day one we had floorboards in the property although the lease does say the flat needs to be carpeted. Although we didn't ask specifically ask for permission it did come up in a mgt meeting in 2003 and was agreed verbally that there was no problem, although in the minutes it states that nothing was discussed on this point.

Since we moved out the new treasurer has insisted that we carpet the property and we have recently had a letter from a solicitor stating that we have to do this or will 'forfiet the lease' - we have no idea what this!

It seems to me that we're being punished by some of the freeholders for not being in the click anymore and for not being actively involved in managing the properties. They have always made it quite clear that they don't like the flats being tenanted and prefer owners to live there. We have never had any issues previously and nothing about the floorboards before. Naturally to carpet it will cost in the region of 1-2k which we really don't have and don't want to do simply because they feel like enforcing this point.

So two questions;

1) do we have any leg to stand on with regards to us being in breach of the lease bearing in mind we believe that it's been agreed (+ other breaches of the lease such as people knocking walls down etc.. .are not being chased) and we've had no carpet for so long

2) What do you do when you feel your property is being managed by a bunch of self-serving idiots? who do you turn to in these circumstances?

Many thanks

MM

[pippay]

I have been in a similar situation in that I owned a leasehold flat owning a share of the freehold and as such were our own Management Company.

At first, the day to day running of it was conducted by a Management Company placed in situ by the developers who were worse than useless, charging us for items belonging to other blocks etc; so in the end we sub-contracted the Management to another Company, with only 3 of us willing to undertake the Duties of Directors. The Management Company were Company Secretary and they were the registered office etc.

They dealt with ALL issues including communal grounds maintenance, communal decorating, general maintenance, complaints, annual budgets, insurance etc and all we had to do was approve the annual reports and accounts at the AGM.

We found this worked very well indeed, as they were totally impartial as to complaints and personal differences and preferences. In fact the Service Charge per flat (in South East London) was one of the most reasonable in the area and included their costs. (£625 p.a. per flat when I sold up last year).

With regard to your particular problem, I don't know how often you held meetings or who was responsible for dealing with complaints regarding covenant breaches. Forgive me for wondering why you didn't raise the fact that this item was missing from the minutes when you received the minutes for approval which, if you were Directors, you should never have signed off as being factual unless you were entirely happy that they were.

Without seeing the lease it is impossible to say whether this (relatively minor) breach would lead to forfeiture of the lease and I think, from what you are saying, they are being prematurely heavy handed in this respect - unless of course, it's being going on for some time and you haven't replied to them?

As a shareholder, I would certainly dispute the reasoning for using company funds to engage a solicitor to write a letter if it wasn't absolutely necessary!!

I would certainly write to them listing your points and if necessary complaining about the other breaches, asking if these are compliant with the lease covenants, especially if walls are being knocked down, as they may have an effect on the structural stability of the property.

Are you sure your tenants aren't making too much noise that is disturbing other residents in the floor below and have, therefore, precipitated this action by the Board?

It may well be that you will have to bite the bullet on this one as the current "Managers" seem fairly hard-nosed. If you're sub-letting the property, which I assume is provided for in the lease, then I personally wouldn't be looking at providing expensive carpet in any event and you maybe over-estimating these costs - depending on the size of the apartment of course - and I'm sure that the cost of carpetng would be far less than the legal costs and the protracted stress in fighting this....

The trouble with having a Management Company set up in this way, is that only the owners who want to be involved seem to have any appreciable say in matters and personal differences, attitudes etc will at some stage always rear their head often to the detriment of those owners who don't wish to be actively involved.

I think if you wanted to propose that the management of the block was undertaken by a sub-contracted Management Company this would need to be done at the AGM under any other business and a majority vote of shareholders or quorum would be required.

We were able to change Management Companies very easily as we were able to show all owners unequivocally that it was cheaper, fairer and far better run than anything we could have done ourselves and therefore it was a done deal as there weren't any objections.

Sorry I can't be more helpful or positive.

[Poppy]

Always rely on the terms of the lease.

You bought the lease using your own free will and hopefully read it first, so why when prompted do you not feel that you should comply with its terms?

If your fellow freeholders have shown that they are willing to spend money on legal advice on this issue, then you should not ignore it. You ought to be glad that your building is being actively managed. Have you read the posts on this forum and elsewhere where buildings are being left to rack and ruin?

Noise is a contentious issue and can cause stress on both sides. I urge you to approach the situation in a conciliatory tone. Why would you not want to?

Forfeit means (in layman's terms) to lose the right to do or have something because you have broken a rule.

[pms]

Noise is a contentious issue and can cause stress on both sides. I urge you to approach the situation in a conciliatory tone. Why would you not want to?



I would agree that noise is a contentious issue but the word noise has a very loose meaning.Are we talking here of noise as in playing loud music or noise as in "airborne" noise.If it is "airborne" noise then in law the freeholders would be wasting their time and this has been proved in law. Baxter vs London Borough of Camden COA (2000).

[Markonee1]

Of course the key point is that they are talking about a ground floor so its only the rats that will have a noise issue...
Or did you say some on the committee were of that type?:D

[Donkin]

"Carpeted" is a strange term. Does the lease specify "fully carpeted" or "fitted carpeted" or just "carpeted" I know its pedantic but getting the hang of this legal lark seems to me there is a loophole.

Oxford English Dictionary
carpet

• noun 1 a floor covering made from thick woven fabric. 2 a large rug. 3 a thick or soft expanse or layer: a carpet of bluebells.

• verb (carpeted, carpeting) 1 cover with a carpet. 2 Brit. informal reprimand severely.

Does the lease specify how much should be carpeted
"Fullycarpeted". Carpet in every room but not necessarily to the edges.
"Fitted carpet". No loose rugs but then again not necessarilly to the edges.

[SteveP]

"Carpeted" is a strange term. Does the lease specify "fully carpeted" or "fitted carpeted" or just "carpeted" I know its pedantic but getting the hang of this legal lark seems to me there is a loophole.

You are barking up the wrong tree. The lease requires the flat to be carpeted, ergo it must be carpeted. The covenant will have been included for the benefit of other tenants and the freeholder must enforce it if another tenant requests them to.

The precise words will only help in determining more precisely what must be done. "Carpeted" or any of the alternatives you suggest is still carpeted.

And ultimately the lease could be Forfeited, so in answer to the original 2 questions.

1) You don't have a leg to stand on, but if you want to complain about other tenants breaches you can. If you insist on the landlord enforcing covenants that are for your benefit he must enforce them, albeit he can insist that you indemnify him against any costs (He and Him being the company of course not an individual).

2) You are a shareholder and it is for you and the other shareholders to decide how the company is run. You have the same power as any shareholder in any company. If most of you want things done differently then use the provisions in the articles and memorandum of the company to force change, if you are in the minority you will have to accept the decision of the majority.