My flat, alongside my neighbour’s, is enduring substantial water penetration owing to a fault in an outer wall. The managing company has committed to remedy the leak source and is presently performing repairs on the external wall through erecting scaffolding among other things. Yet, they have declined to conduct interior mends on my flat, asserting that it isn’t within their mandate and recommending that I file a claim through the block-insurance policy.
Considering the water penetration is coming from a shared space, can the managing company be held accountable for the interior mends? The lease and management contract doesn’t offer clarity on this issue. The inflicted damage is considerable, impacting two rooms to a level of near-unhabitability. The quote to rectify one room involved stripping and packing walls among other tasks, estimated at £6,000. I predict the cost for the second room will be similar.
The insurance policy possesses an excess of £5,000. Past dealings with insurance companies have taught me that they typically don’t compensate for building defects. Nevertheless, I believe this should not be the preferred solution. Is the managing company obliged to conduct interior repairs in any way? If so, how can I enforce that they perform these repairs?
Block-insurance policies under the ownership management company’s name (OMC), are meant to be a safety net for unforeseen risks, but they do not encompass latent defects and it is improbable you will gain relief from this. The appropriate policy to file your claim under, if available, is the Latent Defect Insurance, which doesn’t just cover the defect repair but also includes extended coverage. Normally, this policy remains in effect for a decade since the development’s completion, with only five years available for claims, such as one involving a Homebond policy.
Housing shortage: Neglecting to make a will leaves countless unoccupied flats in a legal quandary.
My flat has suffered significant damage from leaks. Who should foot the bill for repairs, estimated at £6,000 per room?
Could our neighbours possibly be held accountable for maintaining their old and potentially dangerous oak tree?
Should I opt for storage or central heating when it comes to upgrading to an air-to-water pump system?
The Owners’ Management Company (OMC) is liable for the communal areas, provided the maintenance responsibility has been transferred from the development firm. Various pragmatic factors could influence the ability of your OMC to mend any damage to your property. In instances where the communal areas haven’t been transferred, claims may possibly be made against the development firm, who remains the owner of these areas. Either scenario, if no satisfactory resolution is reached, would resort in hefty, tiresome and time-consuming litigation. The expense of a lawsuit should be weighed against the price of the necessary repair work.
OMCs often have an insurance policy covering the development, even if the communal areas are still owned by the development company due to non-transfer of these areas. As per Section 5 of The Multi-Unit Developments Act 2011, since October 1st, 2011, OMCs should hold stewardship over all communal areas.
A scheme is underway to finance the repair of defects in flats constructed between 1991 and 2013. This plan is unfolding during a period when local governments are only inspecting 12-15% of new buildings notified to them. This gap in policy is concerning, and the expected remediation cost currently stands at €5 billion for combined mica, pyrite, and apartment defects. It is forecasted that this cost could rise even further. Extension of the statute of limitations, implementation of a system of proportionate accountability, and creation of efficient and affordable relief from construction defect parties are much needed.
Paul Huberman, a chartered property and facilities manager, and a fellow of the Society of Chartered Surveyors Ireland, provided this information.