A LOCAL VIEW ON LOCAL MANAGING AGENTS

Sometimes a Hornet comments so succinctly about a topic the Dame is forced to elevate it.

Here is on such....

Grist to their greed money making mill!

Dear Dame,

Congratulations on all the hits that your blog is now getting. 

This increase in your website's traffic should put the wind-up all the parliamentary hopefuls in Kensington.

Felicity Buchan MP has a circle to square that will prove impossible.

The Tory Party is in reality, and has always been, on the side of the wealthy, greedy Freeholder (known in Law as the Lessor) and their Managing Agents. 

The last vestiges of feudalism resides in the psyche of every Tory politician. These Tories pay lip service to their constituents about the morality of greedy Freeholders, and their even greedier Managing Agents, fleecing Leaseholders with onerous service charge bills and extortionately high percentage management and supervision fees on top.

There is nothing that a Managing Agent loves more than a building being neglected by its Freeholder. When major works can be put off no longer, these Managing Agents can recover from Leaseholders the costs of the works which need to be done which, in the case of neglected buildings is always expensive. Managing Agents then make their money by levying Management Fees, Surveyors' Fees and Works' Supervision Fees as a percentage of the total major works' bill. The more that a building is neglected the greater the cost to the Leaseholder to put things right and the greater the profit for the Managing Agent. The hypocrisy of property mismanagement.

These Managing Agents are Past Masters at keeping a close on eye on Tribunal decisions about the "reasonableness" of management fees. They rub their grasping hands with glee if they find a Tribunal decision declares a higher than usual percentage management fee as "reasonable." Accordingly, Managing Agents increase the Leaseholders' Management Fee contribution for major works and point out to any Leaseholder who complains that the Tribunal has held that percentage uplift to be a "reasonable" one. These Managing Agents know that most Leaseholders do not want to go anywhere near a Court or a Tribunal and impose these charges in a morally corrupt way.

Joe Powell's Labour Party does not escape unscathed. Between 1997 and 2010, the Labour Party paid lip service to this situation and introduced "Commonhold." This was not a decent solution to the plight of Leaseholders. It was more about protecting the Freeholders' interests. By the time Labour was shafted in 2010, only one or two blocks of flats had taken advantage of the so called Commonhold reforms. Why did Labour shaft Leaseholders at the expense of Freeholders? Many Freeholders in Kensington are landed gentry.

In Scotland, the Tenement (Scotland) Act 2004 created a framework for each leaseholder to own their flat freehold with a share of the common parts of the building being collectively owned (including a share of the airspace on any tenement's roof.) Any landlord wishing to be compensated for loss of the freehold interest was entitled to twenty times the yearly ground rent and had a limited amount of time to make that claim from flat owners. Most landlords were untraceable and very few Leaseholders in Scotland had to pay anything. As a result of these reforms the owners of many flats in Scotland have carried out major works and have had some control over costs, programming of works and outcomes.

Respectfully, My Dear Dame,

A victim