LEASEHOLD - responsibility for Roof

Aedino

I am buying a flat where the leasehold states each flat is responsible for their own level, as it is the top floor flat I would be responsible for the roof. If I buy this property will be be hard to sell again afterwards due to this? The freehold is shared between myself and the flat downstairs. It is a Victorian conversion into three flats.

poppysarah

What do you think? Do you want to take responsibility for the roof? (Is it normal for it to be split this way?)

TotallyBroke

So if the guttering and down pipes needed replacing you would pay for the top half and the other flat for the bottom half.
What does the 3rd flat pay for?
Does the ground floor flat have to pay if the whole house needed underpinning!.

I would seriously look into this leasehold before continuing. Any repairs should be split equally between the three flats or be apportioned to the rateable value of the properties

EdInvestor

Aedino wrote: »

If I buy this property will be be hard to sell again afterwards due to this?

Yes, this is irregular.Lenders would probably say no to such a property.

hedgehogpenguin

I believe my property is on a lease like this. I had no trouble getting a mortgage even after my solicitor pointed this out specifically to them.

Doozergirl

As long as the lease is clear on who is responsible for the costs of what then I don't think it is a problem. It's a minority of flats that have arrangements like these but it certainly isn't unheard of.

Like with any property you buy, get your solicitor to read over the lease for you and tell you straight out. If you are particularly concerned then ask them to do just this before they do anything else - so that you only pay for the time taken for them to check rather than searches etc. which may end up not being needed.

Get the roof checked as well so hat if there might be any issues, you can get the current vendor to shoulder the cost rather than you. A decent roof will be trouble free for longer than I imagine you will need to live in a flat for :

beaujolais-nouveau

Aedino wrote: »

I am buying a flat where the leasehold states each flat is responsible for their own level, as it is the top floor flat I would be responsible for the roof.

Although I think this is unusual - the top flat being solely responsible for the roof - practically speaking I would prefer that arrangement. I live in one of two leasehold flats in a two-storey Victorian terrace, the leases for which say that both flats are equally responsible for the cost of maintaining all of the building (but the actual work of doing so is meant to be organised by the freeholder). However, what happened in practice was: when the roof leaked, only my floor and furnishings got wet; it was only in my flat that buckets had to be stood under the drips; the downstairs flat wasn't affected at all by the leaking roof so the downstairs leaseholder didn't feel compelled to contribute to the cost of repair. So, after a winter during which I had to call out the roofer four times to patch the roof - and paid his bill - I obtained a further advance on my mortgage for the entire cost of replacing the roof, and I didn't ask the other leaseholder to contribute. For reasons too complicated to go into here, I didn't consult the freeholder either - I just invited him/his managing agent to inspect the work while it was still under guarantee (and he didn't).

At the time, I had a secure job and, although very expensive, it was worth it to me to have complete control over who did the work (properly qualified), when, and what materials were used, and ensuring that it was inspected by the local council's building control department (the old roof was of slate, the new roof of tiles so the timber supports had to be reinforced).

However, I am guessing that there must be a quid pro quo -

Aedino wrote: »

If I buy this property will be be hard to sell again afterwards due to this? The freehold is shared between myself and the flat downstairs. It is a Victorian conversion into three flats.

- in your place, I would want to know if (to balance out the upstairs flat's responsibility for the roof) the downstairs flat lease said that the downstairs flat was responsible for the entire cost of something else, eg the damp proof course, when that needed repair or replacement. Where I live, the damp proof course is completely shot but of course my walls are not affected ...!

Aedino

Hi,

thank you all for your replies. I have read through the other flats leases and all levels seem responsible for the gullies & the drains that solely serve their flat. All flats have to pay 1/3 of the repair & maintenance of pipes, wires, cables and drains in or upon the building and the water tank in the roof as well as the upkeep of the main entrance passageway and landings and the painting of the facade.
The ground floor tenant looks after the steps to the flats, tiny path and the wall in front.
Basement flat-"to keep the basement flat in good repair and condition and in particular so as to give support and protection to the first floor flat & ground flat" (does that mean rising damp, subsidence etc?)
Top flat - "There are also included in this covenant the windows of the said flat and the roof of the building and all gutters, drains, gullies (in so far as drains relate exclusively to the top flat)"

I am a bit wary to take on this full responsibility of the roof. Part of the roof was converted into a room, so that is fair enough for me to be responsible for that but to me it just seems the responsibility is poorly defined and divided.

Also oddly enough, the buildings insurance is done individually by flat.

If this arrangement is not so unusual and people wouldn't be put off buying the flat in the future then I am not so worried. I just haven't come across this arrangement before. I have only been made aware of this in the last couple of weeks and we are coming close to signing contracts.

Thanks for all advice & feedback - I need all I can get.

Richard_Webster

Doozergirl wrote: »

As long as the lease is clear on who is responsible for the costs of what then I don't think it is a problem. It's a minority of flats that have arrangements like these but it certainly isn't unheard of.

Like with any property you buy, get your solicitor to read over the lease for you and tell you straight out. If you are particularly concerned then ask them to do just this before they do anything else - so that you only pay for the time taken for them to check rather than searches etc. which may end up not being needed.

Get the roof checked as well so hat if there might be any issues, you can get the current vendor to shoulder the cost rather than you. A decent roof will be trouble free for longer than I imagine you will need to live in a flat for :

I agree.

It is unusual for each flat to maintain its own part of the building particularly if there are more than 2 flats, but it is not a complete show stopper - although in the present market you can afford to be fussier over this sort of detail.. The lack of common insurance is more likely to be an issue - you may have to get the seller to pay for a a one-off contingent buildings insuracne policy which pays out if you suffer loss because one of the other flat owners is not insured or not sufficiently insured.

RLH33

Hiya

A couple of years ago we had an offer accepted on a top floor flat in a building that was converted into flats. They had no management company and it didn't even state on the lease what each flat was responsible for. When we got the survey done the roof needed a lot of work and a total re-roof was needed.

This really scared us as the mortgage company then put a retainer on the mortgage and wouldn't give us any further money until the work had been carried out. Whilst this was bad enough what really worried us was the fact that as the top floor flat you were the first to be affected by any problems and if no-one else was going to help with the costs then we would be on our own. Needless to say we backed out and bought somewhere else.

Personally, I would be really worried about buying something without a clear split of responsibilities between the flats or a management company to carry out/pay for any work that needs doing even though I would obviously have to contribute.

Your lease sounds really good for the basement/ground floor but not so good for you on the top floor. Not only do you have to worry about problems with the roof but you also have responsibility for your windows - probably requiring a scaffold for any repairs/replacements! Sounds expensive to me!