Management company fees in PIA

mtp said:
MPH is now dissolved and that move thing a great deal forward for me as a home owner but i hope u dont mind me saying this but it seem to me that home owner entering these pia agreement .. shld be taking LEGAL ADVISE. If owner member of an omc invested in common fund may be nest one u ever made. .. besst investment.
Click to expand...
Thanks for all your input. I would fully agree with you now in hindsight. I’d go so far as to say that it should be mandatory for a PIA because there is so much at stake
 
  • Like
Reactions: mtp
If u keep getting billed U may have to consider going to court .. application under S24 MUD Act to C Court to determine if the service charge u are being billed with was set in accord with MUD Act and C Act. The liquidator / accountants dont interpert law. They assume OMC well within it power to set s charge and accept or decline participating in a pia scheme. They dont look behind veil. That member job .. it also members property and member wallets. Good luck.
 
mtp said:
If u keep getting billed U may have to consider going to court .. application under S24 MUD Act to C Court to determine if the service charge u are being billed with was set in accord with MUD Act and C Act. The liquidator / accountants dont interpert law. They assume OMC well within it power to set s charge and accept or decline participating in a pia scheme. They dont look behind veil. That member job .. it also members property and member wallets. Good luck.
Click to expand...
Hello thanks again for the advice. I’ll definitely look more into that when I have all the information at hand
 
all u need do is, get on to land reg give your address and ascertain if common areas transferred to omc and if so folio number of not no liability for service charges until three years after they have, been transferred to omc. Thus, is, act and public record that grant Thornton on notice of also. In other words pip who were paid ought to have written to omc board it is one of the debts a pip deals with advising board of section eighteen of the mud act and to furnish evidence of compliance with it commencing with note of folio number contain common areas or in absence of that letter confirming no liability for service charge in accord with act. If grant Thornton have not done that to date sure they can do it.
 

Attachments

  • Multi-Unit Developments Act 2011, Section 18.pdf
    76.8 KB · Views: 116
I think you’re reading the act wrongly. I haven’t read the full article section 18 part seven says that only the annual service charge can be used for repairs that was the responsibility of the builder only if three years has passed with the content of the members
 
mtp said:
all u need do is, get on to land reg give your address and ascertain if common areas transferred to omc and if so folio number of not no liability for service charges until three years after they have, been transferred to omc. Thus, is, act and public record that grant Thornton on notice of also. In other words pip who were paid ought to have written to omc board it is one of the debts a pip deals with advising board of section eighteen of the mud act and to furnish evidence of compliance with it commencing with note of folio number contain common areas or in absence of that letter confirming no liability for service charge in accord with act. If grant Thornton have not done that to date sure they can do it.
Click to expand...
But thanks anyway because you are opening my eyes to the legislation and I can go back and check the legality of every service charge. I cannot remember the last time I was invited to the AGM
 
Fastmover said:
But thanks anyway because you are opening my eyes to the legislation and I can go back and check the legality of every service charge. I cannot remember the last time I was invited to the AGM
Click to expand...
I am a solicitor retired owner of house in a mud estate who issued and served circuit court proceedings under the mud act on Manor Park Homebuilders Limited and receiver for the simple reason that neither receiver or fingal co co wld maintain c 11 acres of lands .. so it was us or them We know the 11 acres include the public open spaces and common areas to be maintained by the man co.
S18.6 states that members (assuming member have the right under the companies act ) can pay for services that are or were the responsibility of the developer but only on written consent of 75 peer cent but S18.6 HAS NO EFFECT if common areas not transferred to the man company for three years. Our man company is struck off .But it can be restored when the issue the transfer completed and the public open spaces in charge.
Why on earth why dont u save yoursleves the cost of agents and fee when not laible if common areas transferseed but yr decisons.
I suggest again u contact land registry give them your address and find out if folio opened containing the common areas of the apartment block if so then it seem to me u are bound by what u signed .. i refer to a financial statement noting that no contact made with man co and no reply if that part of the pia u signed and common areas transferred then ?? If not then why on earth is omc filing annual returns. Suggest also u and neighbours sit down with result of land reg search. I can do search but fee. .
 
Fastmover u started conversation looking for help and complaining about the grant thornton and that u were so sure that the service charges were part of the insolvency agreement u signed but u are getting bill for service charges with interest etc up to 44 thousand euro. U have S18.6 of MUD Act. Your choice no one else can do it for u .. PAY or get land reg search and ascertain if common areas transferred to the omc. Cost of a tel call . Good luck
 
mtp said:
Fastmover u started conversation looking for help and complaining about the grant thornton and that u were so sure that the service charges were part of the insolvency agreement u signed but u are getting bill for service charges with interest etc up to 44 thousand euro. U have S18.6 of MUD Act. Your choice no one else can do it for u .. PAY or get land reg search and ascertain if common areas transferred to the omc. Cost of a tel call . Good luck
Click to expand...
Hello thanks for all your information. I’m not being obtuse at the moment it’s just fighting fires and bit by bit I’m getting to deal now with the management company. You’ve certainly given me the direction I can focus on and I appreciate all your advice. I have finally got Grant Thornton to admit their mistake so now that that has happened I can look at the legitimacy of the management fees... the question I need to decide is my best bet pursuing Grant Thornton to rectify the situation or do all the legwork myself to invalidate the management fees.
 
Last edited:
Suggest again u get on to land reg. If common areas transferred to omc than u are bound for s charge set in compliance with the act at least u have search showing not transferred if that the case if to go back with to grant Thornton. I suspect that if they are not in charge that u may also have problem re land around block .. are they in charge or are residents clearing litter,
U might also write to your local planning authority and request a certificate of taking in charge .. they cost 90.00. That is what planning authorities give to solicitors acting for vendors who are selling houses / apartments in mud estates. It will probably confirm that road and service abutting block in charge in charge but will it confirm that land around block in charge ? I suspect u may have issue here also. All to do with money in national fund to complete these estates.

The whole purpose of mud act to lessen the cost on homeowner in these estate where builder went bust with estates not completed . i.e o.m.c cant levy charges until three years after common areas transferred to o.m.c.

Think u need to do your search cos ony with them have u anything to work on or else continue .. why shd Board change tack or Grant Thornton u need to have something to show them ? And if search show that common areas are transferred then u know u do have a liability and member of the omc can set the s charges.
 
Repeat if common areas not transferred to OMC then OMC cant levy under S18.6 until three years after they have been transferred. Insuring common areas may be an issue if common areas not transferred that would need to be thrashed out at meeting of members but again the land registry search results for if common areas transferred then service charge may well be all in order. But if not then it may be agreed to fund cost of insurance and accounts but no liability at all for service charge. If solicitor for a vendor cant confirm compliance with pp (that cert of tic form local authority) then that affect the price a apt will get. That land reg search and cert of tic form local authority will give u a clearer idea of where u and other apt owner stand. There are steps under planning acts that allows residents initiate the TIC process probably on your own local authority website.
 
mtp said:
Repeat if common areas not transferred to OMC then OMC cant levy under S18.6 until three years after they have been transferred. Insuring common areas may be an issue if common areas not transferred that would need to be thrashed out at meeting of members but again the land registry search results for if common areas transferred then service charge may well be all in order. But if not then it may be agreed to fund cost of insurance and accounts but no liability at all for service charge. If solicitor for a vendor cant confirm compliance with pp (that cert of tic form local authority) then that affect the price a apt will get. That land reg search and cert of tic form local authority will give u a clearer idea of where u and other apt owner stand. There are steps under planning acts that allows residents initiate the TIC process probably on your own local authority website.
Click to expand...
Hello I have done land registry searches and all I see are transfer of apartments to different people I don’t see any mention of it being transferred to the OMC. I can see in the building folio it has been transferred but land registry just told me the owner of the common area is still the developer. Sorry that was my mistake I missed part two of the folio which shows that the developer is still the registered owner of the common area
 
  • Like
Reactions: mtp
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top