Managing Agents

[Hotpend]

The owner of the property management company that manages the flats where I live agreed in 2004 to be Company Secretary of our small limited company that owns the freehold as no leaseholder wanted the job. He charges £270 per year. He has been paid more than £2000 since he started the "job".

In 2008 the law was changed and our company no longer required a secretary. This man either did not know of the change in the law, or he did and it was not in his interests to tell us.

Comments appreciated.

[brian]

Re: Managing Agents

This man either did not know of the change in the law, or he did and it was not in his interests to tell us.

If I understand this right, then you are asking if someone paid to act as a company secretary should have withdrawn after the change in the law?

If so, am afraid it's very much up to your company to make that decision. Employees and contractors do not habitually sack themselves. It is up to the company paying them to make that decision.

You may also find that whether or not you legally need a company secretary, you may need a single postal/telephone contact as required, which this person is providing by the sounds of it.

[Hotpend]

Re: Managing Agents

Thanks, Brian.

This man charges our company to be secretary, but our company also pays his company a fee to manage our property. My guess is that he does very little (if anything) himself. The staff he employs do the work by answering our telephone calls letters and emails, and actually managing the property.

Our company made an agreement. I do however feel this man could have advised our directors of the change in the law as he knew they only appointed him because at the time a secretary was needed. His staff provide the necessary point of contact.

[brian]

Re: Managing Agents

I do however feel this man could have advised our directors of the change in the law as he knew they only appointed him because at the time a secretary was needed.

From my perspective, I wouldn't necessarily see this as anything insiduous - firstly, because not everyone in business was made aware of this, and secondly, because a commercial service was already being provided for.

Rather than worry about the few hundred pounds you've spent on this service already, it may be more prudent on simply ensuring that any services that are not required be removed, in order to save thousands in the long run.

[Hotpend]

Re: Managing Agents

Last night it was the AGM. Our secretary turned up and prepared the act as chairman of the meeting. I objected as our Articles of Association require a director to act as chairman. One of the directors agreed to act as chairman. Almost every item on the agenda presented an opportunity for me to point out how the managing agents were getting things wrong. I then asked the secretary how much time he actually spent doing work as the secretary. He was not able to tell me. When I suggested we could do without a secretary, he came back with the reply that we needed one "by law." That gave me the opportunity to point out to the other leaseholders that he was not aware of the change in the law. The secretary eventually became frustrated, called me something very rude and announced he was resigning! Unfortunately the feeble collection of "yes men" at the meeting persuaded him to stay on. What a lost opportunity.