We at HorNet, together with the National Leasehold Campaign and many determined individuals, have successfully raised awareness of the way the privately managed estates model is detrimental to home buyers, their communities and the quality of the estates themselves.
The governments response is to propose regulation in a similar way to leasehold, giving rights to challenge charges and change manager in the Land’s Tribunal and possibly a right to manage as well. They also say they will repeal section 121 of the Law of Property Act so that the freehold cannot be lost for non payment.
We feel that these measures will simply legitimise the private management model without making a significant improvement for the estate dwellers who pay the charges.
Only adoption or some novel form of public ownership and management will address:
The fundamental unfairness of one group paying for the upkeep of open spaces and park facilities which are open to the general public
Non adopted estates are built to a lower standard, and subsequently deteriorate more quickly in future.
Home buyers blindly take on long term liability for repair/maintenance of sub standard areas if they sign up to private estate management when they purchase. Whilst these liabilities are not of the order of defective cladding, they can still be significant. Should the estate dwellers have to pay for a defect on land which does not belong to them?
Self management is not a panacea! We have had numerous reports of rogue directors in Residents Management Companies, it is divisive and simply not necessary for these areas to be managed in this way. Some form of communal management is necessary for flats but this is not the case for estates, unless they are truly private and gated. HorNet support common hold for these latter situations.
Do you agree? Here is the survey:
