Security issues, no liability being accepted

[em_cat]

Hi

We have a very serious issue with security in our development and neither the developer nor the acting Managing Agent is doing anything about it (Transfer of Common Areas not taken place). No liability being accepted means neither will accept responsibility for undertaking the repairs and/or maintenance that is needed to secure and repair the communal areas as well dealing the trespass issues that we are experiencing. To clarify, on numerous occasions residents are finding people sleeping rough in the service and fire hatches within the stairwells, areas the underground car park and other places located in the communal areas. Also residents are continuously coming across human excrement and evidence of drug usage in the areas.

The Gardi are aware of these issues and do what they can to help, however we do have to deal with the fact that once unauthorised persons have gained access to the blocks, it becomes civil trespass and as such we have been told that the 'owner' must make the reports and as such these issues take place in the common areas so residents are in a catch 22.

Would really appreciate some advice from the community here!

Thanks.

 

[lantus]

The OMC have a right of ownership even before the common areas are transferred (confirmed by one of the best solicitors who specialises on OMCs and transfers.) Who are the directors? The managing agent does not decide what they accept liability for, they are instructed by the directors.

If both the agent and developer insist they have no responsibility then presumably they don't levy any fees? After all how can you insist on payment for something you claim you don't own? The fact is you can and they enforce payment through the courts so the directors and OMC do have a liability.

This will depend to an extent on the status of the developer and the common land lease agreement and how it has been managed to date. If the OMC has taken on responsibility and the developer no longer levies fees then the OMC IS responsible by assuming such. Its a fairly common approach even through many legal contracts can be interpreted otherwise.

I would write or seek to meet the directors and if no satisfactory answers are given then call an EGM with all of your fellow like minded residents to discuss this matter. Ideally you will have developed some solutions prior to the AGM and some ideas of costs and timelines so people can vote there and then on what they want to do, if anything.

Poor security may just be a nuisance today but it could lead to damage and more serious problems which ultimately only the owners will have to pay to remedy.

 

[em_cat]

Lantus

Thanks for your reply. What you've posted makes pure sense.

We are due to hold our AGM by the end of November, and I know http an EMG was called earlier in the year, but did not go ahead. I think it had to do with numbers. Private ownership is outweighed by the developer, local authority and a voluntary housing association. In fairness though, the voluntary housing association are like minded with the private ownership and have been putting a significant amount of pressure on the EMC to act on these issues. I suspect we will have wait and see what kind of proposals and /or solutions will come from the AGM.

Cheers, em_cat