Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 12 Mar 2015

Vol. 871 No. 3

Multi-Unit Developments (Amendment) Bill 2015: First Stage

I move:

That leave be granted to introduced a Bill entitled an Act to amend the Multi-Unit Developments Act 2011 in order to better provide for the clear definition of multi-unit development thereby facilitating expedient application of the law in relation to the taking in charge of unfinished estates.

The Bill is a very simple one. Its intention is to rectify a defect in the Multi-Unit Developments Act. I spoke at length to the previous Minister for Justice and Equality about the difficulty with said Act. At least one local authority, if not more, has been asked for its view on the matter. The difficulty concerns the definition of a multi-unit development. The flaw in the legislation means that any development of more than five houses is deemed to be a multi-unit development, which imposes on it a requirement to introduce a management company. That is the way local authorities are interpreting the legislation. Instead of resolving the issue, the legislation is posing new difficulties. The issue is a simple one and relates to definition. Essentially, the Bill seeks that a structure requiring a management company would be a multi-unit development with one roof over it. I got a solicitor to help me to draft the wording and I hope it is sufficiently robust.

Management companies have been a very difficult issue for people to resolve. Prior to the crash, when people arrived at a solicitor's office to get the keys of their new home, they were told to sign for them and were advised that it was just a matter of form. They then discovered that they were part of a management company that placed an annual financial obligation on them. I do not refer to situations where a management company is required but to traditional housing developments. Management companies are very difficult to unwind as they are framed according to company law, which gives rise to difficulty when a local authority takes an estate in charge. Many local authorities are concerned that only one entity would be involved in the management of the estate, which means the management company must be wound down.

I recently published a booklet to help people to unpick the issue as it is a complex area. I would prefer not to introduce the Bill. I would prefer if the change could be made by way of amendment to the legislation as a matter of urgency. The very least we should do is not to make things difficult for people. Local authorities are starting to get new development proposals and new planning applications are being made to them. The difficulty is that the planning applications will have a requirement for a management company when there is no need for one. This will cause considerable administrative problems in the future, which will result in needless extra expense. It is a relatively simple matter to ensure that does not happen. I hope the Government will address the issue in advance of the Bill even having an airing.

Is the Bill opposed?

Question put and agreed to.

Since this is a Private Members' Bill, Second Stage must, under Standing Orders, be taken in Private Members' time.

I move: "That the Bill be taken in Private Members' time."

Question put and agreed to.
Top
Share