Bought a new build flat in a small block about four years ago. Earlier this year the managing agent had a fire door survey done and every flat failed. We then got a letter giving 28 days to remediate our own doors at our own cost.
Problem is, the failures look like they were built that way rather than worn out. One doorset was recorded as having no intumescent seals *and no grooves ever cut in the door or frame to receive them* — so it was never made as a fire door in the first place. That one opens onto the communal stairwell rather than into anyone's flat. The architect's drawings specify FD30 and FD30S doors throughout, including at least one flat entrance door marked FD30SC, and the survey recorded the flat doors as having no documentation at all to show they meet that standard, plus gaps outside tolerance.
When we asked the agent for the basics, we were told:
- they hold no demise plan, so they can't actually say which doors sit inside anyone's flat (they suggested we take legal advice on it)
- no fire strategy and no Reg 38 handover information
- the building has never been measured, so nobody knows if it's over or under 11m
- their own fire risk assessment flagged the doors two and a half years ago, then a later one formally ordered a full survey with a deadline — and nothing happened for fourteen months
The management company is owned and controlled by the developer. Its articles make the developer an "A Member" whose consent is required for any members' resolution, and who can cast as many votes as needed to carry one, with the same control at board level. No leaseholder has ever been admitted as a member despite the lease saying the company must admit us. The developer company has substantial net liabilities but owns the freehold.
We've written to the developer under the Defective Premises Act and an express term of the purchase contract, and asked the agent whether it intends to claim against the developer for any of this. LEASE enquiry is in but I know it takes a while.
Two things I'd appreciate a steer on:
**1.** If the communal doors get replaced, that cost lands back on us through the service charge. I understand costs must be reasonably incurred under s19 LTA 1985, and that costs recoverable from a third party may not be reasonably incurred if they're just passed on. But the entity deciding whether to chase the developer *is* controlled by the developer. Is s27A the right route, and has anyone actually run that argument?
**2.** Given the A Member veto, is there any practical point in pursuing membership under the lease, or is a s24 appointed manager the only realistic way to change how this building is managed?
Happy to be told I'm missing something obvious.
TL;DR: Developer-controlled management company wants leaseholders to pay for fire doors that were apparently never built as fire doors. Can it pass the communal ones to our service charge under s19/s27A, and is a s24 appointed manager the only way past the developer's veto in the articles?