Selling my flat of 6 years - my Lease has been incorrect the whole time - am I stuck?

Elfbert · 4 October 2016 at 12:49PM

neilio wrote: »

If I haven't been clear already, I'll say it again: it was built with laminate. Which is why it seems crazy that I may now have to go and find some non-existent evidence that it was built with laminate in the first place!

And I cannot fathom that it is a standard clause in Leasehold flats. That means there are possibly thousands of new build flats and apartments all over the country (what ISN'T built with wood or laminate floors these days?) containing such a clause. It's nonsense.

To be honest, all the new-ish flats I've looked at recently have a Karndean/Amtico type floor in living areas, if they don't have carpets, never laminate. These sorts of vinyl-tile wood effect floors are MUCH quieter than laminate.

I do understand your frustration though. Our HA forbids laminate flooring, but whenever flats come up for sale which have been fitted with it, they always highlight it as a 'feature' on their website listing! It's a ridiculous situation.

neilio · 4 October 2016 at 12:52PM

It is in fact a high quality wood floor; not laminate. Stupidly I have been calling it either laminate or wood interchangeably, but it's definitely a high quality, solid wood. Regardless, the Lease says no wood nor laminate. I resent that the laziness of the housing association once upon a time in copying old Leases without updating them is causing so much hassle now.

chelseablue · 4 October 2016 at 12:54PM

My lease said exactly the same about carpeting throughout except kitchen and bathroom.

When I sold I did have carpets but loads of people in the block had wood flooring and sold without issues. The lease was written in the 1970's though, don't know if that makes a difference

Hoploz · 4 October 2016 at 4:50PM

Yes I think you have done the right thing

Land_Registry · 5 October 2016 at 6:55PM

Not our area but something we have been asked and one other thing may be worth considering, albeit this worked for a Residents' Assoc freeholder and not a HA as you have

If the freeholder is willing to confirm there were no objections to the type of flooring put in that may satisfy the buyer's solicitor if they apply the same logic as posted

Just something else to add to the mix but no guarantees. And as others have posted it's all about noise reduction

boliston · 5 October 2016 at 7:11PM

I brought my flat as a new build 10 years ago and the lease had the usual "must be carpeted apart from bathroom & kitchen" rule yet the brochure for the development (which I have kept as proof) shows an artists impression of the living room clearly having wood flooring (it was brought off plan). As I had no intention of living in a carpeted flat (hate the things!) I got a written letter from the freeholder granting permission to install a wooden floor.

neilio · 5 October 2016 at 7:25PM

My solicitor came back with purchaser solicitor comments. Apparently the purchaser solicitor doubts that the reason behind the clause's inclusion is due to sound, which is a nonsense stance to take, and request the clause be removed. So I have agreed to an indemnity policy for just under £300. As expected, my solicitor said that if we were to approach the housing association about this then we wouldn't be able to get the indemnity policy at all. They really get you between a rock and a hard place.

neilio · 12 October 2016 at 9:17AM

The purchaser solicitor is really digging his heels on this issue by now claiming that if the building was built and lease issued with wooden flooring provided, then (in his opinion) the housing association would not object to the clause being removed. This is despite my solicitor already explaining (at least twice) that the HA is highly unlikely to remove the clause due to all other flats having the same clause in their leases and wanting to retain the right to invoke the clause if there are noise complaints, whilst reminding him that he should be aware that approaching the HA about this subject at all would preclude us from being able to get the indemnity policy if they refuse.

My further research since starting this thread has concluded that this is a standard clause in leases, as pretty much everyone I know who lives in a modern flat with wooden floor provided has the exact same clause.

Why would the purchaser solicitor be behaving this way? He has already accepted two other indemnity policies; why not this one?

If I did approach the HA about this (and this is completely hypothetical as I have no intention of taking this risk) and they do say no, precluding an indemnity policy, then what would be the remaining option aside from ripping up the floor and putting carpet down?

magicpork · 12 October 2016 at 10:03AM

It seems very odd that a new-build will include a clause like. Laminate or engineered wood, none of them impose a noise-insulation problem these days with modern flats and I can't remember the last time I saw a carpetted living room in a flat.

Miss_Samantha · 12 October 2016 at 10:16AM

If the flat was sold to you like that by the developer (freeholder) then there is no breach because you, the leaseholder, did not install laminate at all.

PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING

Selling my flat of 6 years - my Lease has been incorrect the whole time - am I stuck?

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free