A builder company has carried out substantial work on a property managed by a house management company. Negotiations and instructions came from the company secretary, who also made stage payments on behalf of the company. However the final payment has not been made – the secretary says that one of the leaseholders (a director) refused to pay his (substantial) share because some extra work relating only to his flat was not done.
The management company accounts show only a small figure for fixed assets and no cash. Is it worth taking it or the secretary to Small Claims Court?
Happy new year to all!
Related resources
Replies (15)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
Yes, they instructed the builder to do the work. They did it so should be paid.
Why should they foot the bill, there's no excuse not to pay so cause as much disruption as you can. Small claims court is pretty cheap.
The secretary was acting on behalf of the company so it's the company you should take to court and not the secretary
How much is at stake? What paperwork do you have in place? Was the extra work that was not done part of the contract? If so, why was it not done?
This is still a legal question rather than an accountancy one. We might be able to give you some pointers but you are still better off taking legal advice if you consider going ahead.
Before you go to court is the extra work that wasn't done in the contract or was this an add on after the price was agreed? Why wasn't the extra work carried out?
As said, really a legal question, but seems to be a liability of the flat management company (not its secretary). Irrelevant that one of the leaseholders refuses to pay the management co - that is for them to sort out internally.
Interesting that extra work relating to that individual flat was not done - this may not fall within the management company's remit, depending on the lease etc, but again, this is not relevant to the builder's claim.
Here's the crux of the perennial accounting question. Dormant or trading?
With whom is your contract? Is it in writing?
The question asked (for competent accountants) was: with SCC judgement against it, can the leaseholders close down the FMC and start a new one? Or, with SCC judgement against it, will the leaseholders be forced to put money into the FCC (directly or indirectly) and pay up?
The question asked (for competent accountants) was: .....
You'd be better relying on a competent lawyer, though, wouldn't you ?
And presenting him with a few more facts - like who contracted for this work.
Except those actually weren't the questions asked in your OP!
And, as lion and others have said, you are getting deeper and deeper into areas of process and risk on which a lawyer would be a better bet as an adviser.
I think several competent accounants have suggested you take legal advice, this being a legal question, not an accountancy one. They have also asked for important relevant information, issues a solicitor is also likely to need answers to if they are to address your query properly.The question asked (for competent accountants) was: with SCC judgement against it, can the leaseholders close down the FMC and start a new one? Or, with SCC judgement against it, will the leaseholders be forced to put money into the FCC (directly or indirectly) and pay up?
But, by all means, insult responders by implying they are incompetent. That always gets better results, especially to questions asked in the wrong type of forum with lots of important detail missing.
But, by all means, insult responders by implying they are incompetent. That always gets better results, especially to questions asked in the wrong type of forum with lots of important detail missing.
It's one thing for laymen to confuse the roles of accountants and lawyers.
Quite another for accountants to do that.
The question asked (for competent accountants) was: with SCC judgement against it, can the leaseholders close down the FMC and start a new one? Or, with SCC judgement against it, will the leaseholders be forced to put money into the FCC (directly or indirectly) and pay up?
Have you checked the Articles of Association?? They may give you a clue as to the way forward
Unless you have altered the question this post is 100% incorrect. Read Andy556's response and act upon it. You can use Thomas Higgins if you don't want to do the job yourself. It's unlikely that the leaseholders will want to form a new company just to evade their liabilities - however Companies House may give a clue as to how long the company has been in existence. And stop insulting those trying to help.
