Freeholder charging £36k for a new roof for my BTL Flat!?

Reply to the comment left by Clint at 05/03/2020 - 11:28
Clint
How can you possibly know that the OP is being "ripped off" on the basis of the information provided? Three contractors quoted and the lowest quote of the 3 has been chosen. You seem to be placing enormous weight on the, probably casual, remarks of the "professional roofers" who didn't quote and who may not have even seen the roof. Shocked Landlord doesn't say when they gave their figure. If it was a few years ago when builders/roofers was much cheaper that will affect the price. Nor do we know the size of the roof, its complexity, the type of tiles specified, access issues etc., etc.
How do you know you had "the exact same situation" in 2006? You don't. Each house is different. Please read Graham Bowcock's post at 9.02am which explains why the cost may seem high.

Reply to the comment left by Ian Narbeth at 05/03/2020 - 16:01
Ian
I came to my conclusion based on the following statements made by shocked Landlord:
1. When i’d spoken to professional roofers at the time, they seemed to indicate it would cost somewhere between £12k-£16k plus VAT. And half that again for a one man band that I’ve used before and has done a friends roof for under 10K
2. £3k for replacing some slates and 2 new gully’s. At the time a friend had had his entire roof replaced for under £10k
3. Surveyors fee @ 11.5% to include 2% CDM fees: £2,990
VAT @ 20%: £598
that the OP is being ripped off. This is all based on what Shocked Landlord has written and it does appear that he has done some research before having made the statements he has. I can only base what I have stated from his comments. Perhaps, I should have stated that Shocked Landlord is being ripped off based on my personal judgment and his comments.
I have many properties and in most of the cases l, along with other leaseholders believe that the management companies are ripping them off based on the costs of works and how much it is possible to get works carried out for.
When I stated the “exact same situation”, I meant that the management company wanted the roof replaced when it was not necessary which seems to be indicated by point 2 where it appears that the roof could be repaired however, was not and to me having many dealings with roofs, find 2. far in excess of what it should cost to the job in 2.
With regards to the three quotes I assumed rightly or wrongly that they were the ones from contractors that the management company had chosen which may not necessarily be the case however, I believe from my experience with management companies over many years, it is highly likely that the statements I have made are more than likely correct.
I do not wish to debate what I have written is correct or incorrect, I am just giving my personal advice and trying to help Shocked Landlord if I possibly can.
I also believe rightly or wrongly, the contractor of Shocked Landlord did not want to quote as it would take a lot of his time going through 15 pages of specifications when he was not sure that he would get the job.
This may be irrelevant however, I would like to state that I even at one time had a contractor tell me that he did not want to do a job as the management company were acting crookedly in asking him to increase his quote so that they could come to some deal.

Graham Bowcock's assessment tallies with my own experience, the only thing I might query is the 5.99% interest, you could get a better rate from your bank.

I had a roof completely repaired last year (albeit listed so Welsh slate required) and it was £40000 in total, which was actually very reasonable.

That said, who owns the freehold and why is not held by the flat owners? Do you pay ground rent? RTM is an option but better to buy it outright if you can.

However, don't underestimate the hassle and costs it will cause you, and you will probably still need the roof done

For my two cents, your choice is either to self manage and treat any jobs as a householder would, saving yourself money on both the job itself and the laborious processes that a management company is forced to carry out in order to protect themselves from any comeback; or accept that if you don’t want the responsibility and extra workload of day to day self management, you need to accept that major works will cost far more. If your management company doesn’t use trained professionals to assess requirements and create a full safety framework they are probably not qualified to manage your property. The downside of having this detailed framework is you’re going to be restricted to the bigger more professional firms who are used to operating with CDMs, safety files & detailed surveys. These firms will cost significantly more than the ‘one man banders’ who will just get on with the job & that do jobs for ordinary householders. You can’t have your cake & eat it usually...

Reply to the comment left by terry sullivan at 05/03/2020 - 15:18
That sounds like the knee jerk reaction of the populist media.

For every person moaning about the costs there may well be somebody suffering from a leaking roof; those people need the protection of leasehold and the ability to enforce their lease. Share freehold would be a free for all - I can't see how this would work to actually get anything done.

Buying a leasehold property is a matter of choice; some properties are better managed than others. The issue is that most buyers have rose tinted glasses and don't listen properly to their legal advice - or worse don't get decent legal advice. If they want to pay so little for conveyancing then problems will inevitably happen.

Reply to the comment left by Graham Bowcock at 07/03/2020 - 15:32
Absolute bollox

Hi Neil,

From what I can tell, the correct procedures seem to have been followed.

Reply to the comment left by Paul Shears at 03/03/2020 - 20:54
Due to the freeholder being responsible for the building, this is not something I would be able to do myself. I am considering getting a roof survey done for a second option on whether the new roof is actually required or whether repairs would be more appropriate.

Reply to the comment left by Graham Bowcock at 04/03/2020 - 09:02Thank you for your reply, it's very interesting to have the perspective of someone that used to be a managing agent.
In regards to the professional roofers costings, while they were 'ballpark figures' I hadn't yet had the specification from the surveyor to give to them, my fear is that because the specification is so onerous (they are not even allowed to play music) that most smaller roofing companies didn't want to deal with the hassle of that 'red tape' (which is why I believe only 3/14 companies ended up submitting a tender) and the large companies obviously prices the job higher to make it worth their time. Regarding the contractor that I put forward, on the notice of estimates I received back from the freeholder, they, along with a few other companies, were marked as declined. I am still trying to ascertain whether the contractor declined to tender or the freeholder declined their tender.
In regards to the managing agent, they are not actually doing anything with the project. They have delegated that to surveyor, who is getting well paid for it. All the managing agent is doing is serving the notices that the surveyor tells them to serve.
Indeed on the face of it, it does seem that the procedures have been followed, however I am still skeptical as to whether a new roof is actually needed. The freeholders surveyor simply said that the roof was at the end of its life. But that was said 6 years ago as well by the same surveyor, with hardly any maintenance has still be going strong...

I am considering getting my own roof survey of the roof for a second opinion.

Reply to the comment left by J Kaapa at 05/03/2020 - 09:48
Hi J Kaapa

The freeholder is a different company and not connected to either of the 2 leaseholders.

I was aware of the ability to RTM. For some reason though, I thought the requirement was over 50%.

I'm not sure if we are too far down the road with the current works to start the RTM process and whether we could stop the current Section 20 from going ahead.

Also if we were to go down the RTM route. What other fees could the freeholder impose every year to make sure the RTM is complying?