to feel discriminated against a tenant?

[christina1988]

We rent a lovely flat in a nice apartment block and I'm not sure about the legal term but all the owners kind of own a share in the land it's built on (freehold?). There is a service charge and there is a committee of residents who meet and decide on the budget, make decisions about the aesthetics of the place and so on.

There was a notice put on the communal notice board that they are looking for new committee members and that interested parties should contact Mrs M. in flat 10.

I went to her to express my interest and got a really snooty reply that the "commitee is not for tenants, but only for owners", and she then went on to say that she became an outright owner before she was 30, her husband is a doctor, blah blah blah.... and even something along the lines of 'I'm my opinion, only those who own land should be allowed to vote [in general elections!] because they have nothing to lose'. She said that tenants are transitory in nature and asked 'how can one truly be proud of something that isn't theirs?' and that it would not make sense to have tenants on the committee as they'll 'probably have done a moonlight flit within six months'.

I feel absolutely belittled, as though I don't belong in my own home and that I'm not an owner occupier but someone younger than me is... :( I actually had a lie down and a little cry after this morning's exchange.

She was a little abrupt but right. It is usually only the home owners who are on the committee and tenants do tend to treat properties not as well as they aren't theirs so it makes no difference to them.

With this nasty woman's backwards attitude I can completely see how it would be something for the menz to deal with. You know, seeing though she wants to live in the time when the little wifeys were judged by their husbands success.

OP, she's a dick. I applaud you for offering to be on a committee. Okay, you didn't know it was owners only. Big deal. Well done for offering to give up your time for something which a lot of people ignore, and then moan when decisions are made without them.

Please do make sure to give Mrs M a head tilt and smile when you mention it being nice that she married a man who could afford a flat, seeing that as a housewife she wouldn't be able to buy. Though of course, you personally, would struggle to live off a man ::tinkly laugh:: and throw in a patronising "dear" somewhere too!

I understand the premise that a tenant is likely to be less invested than an owner. However i really don't understand why you would actively exclude tenants who DID want to be as involved as they could.

Surely the whole thing is self selecting isn't it? I mean those who don't give a rats arse aren't going to be the ones clamoring to join the committee and give up their time for meetings are they?

I can quite imagine there are a fair few owners who wont be giving up their evenings ...

It's not about time, or good ideas Laiste, it's about legal status and money.

In this set up, the freeholders are shareholders in a freehold-owning company. Some will be company directors. This group is a committee of shareholders, who make decisions about upkeep of the building and allocation of budgets - form the fees paid by every shareholder.

Renters pay rent to their landlord, who pays a fee to the company. Renters are not shareholders, so cannot vote in shareholders' meetings.

The idea of involving DH's is pretty silly OP, as 'important doctor DH' will just explain the difference between shareholders and tenants. Probably in a condescending manner. It's a pretty simple distinction, so he will wonder why his time is being wasted.

Just avoid the horrid lady in future.

Btw, OP it reminds me a bit of the film 'Hampstead', which is sweet but not a great film. It features a meeting of freeholders in the building in which Diane Keaton's character owns a flat, hosted by a crashing snob of the 'my DH is so important' variety, called Fiona. Watch and laugh?