A Real Estate Mess: The Palm, Nakheel and the Banned Beach
Kipp can’t help wonder why a developer like Nakheel, with the breath and scale of developments across the region hasn’t mastered the rather simple concept of service fees for freehold properties?
December 21, 2011 3:51 by Eva Fernandes
And so it continues. Merely days after the last Palm Jumeriah debacle tenants are now complaining of being banned from using the beach, pool and having gym access. Those tenants living in apartments that have unpaid service fees are the ones facing the ban. Essentially, this is just another aspect of the battle between the developer and the owner. While the developer insists the owner should cough up the cash, many owners either think service charge is either too high or not well matched to the maintenance being provided. And while the two hash out the not so-cold war, the one left stranded in the middle is, the tenant.
One such tenant Alison told The National: “They can’t penalise tenants for service charges going back five years. I’m not in arrears for anything. I am paying to have access to the beach, pool, gym, and I don’t have that any longer. I don’t know where to go or who to talk to.”
Now, seeing as Nakheel has strangely gotten a taste for social work and other acts of charity—you’d imagine the last thing the company would want to reward those tenants coughing up thousands upon thousands of Dirhams every month to stay on their precious premises, is a feeling of being short changed.
Kipp can’t help wonder why a developer like Nakheel, with the breath and scale of developments across the region hasn’t mastered the rather simple concept of service fees for freehold properties? Either way, Nakheel should get on top of the issue before the negative press goes international—it has a bad enough rep already.