Legal advice on Flat with stubborn freeholder

gman20_2

Good news. Looks like she doesn't live above.
She lives a few miles away (Or that's the address the freehold is registered to).
I think she's just a buy to letter trying to get the whole deal. I see no reason to let her get away with this.
I can see her reasoning though. Owning the freehold, and the 2 flats is valuable.

Edit: I see. The problem is, the seller is a company acting on behalf of northern rock. It's a repo. So the person who it got repo'd off isn't going to do them any favors i'm guessing.

ILW

What you have to realise is the freeholder OWNS the building that your flat is in. You in fact will not actually own the flat at all, all you are buying is the right to use it for the next 80 years. Any maintenance issues have to be sorted by the freeholder and they do have a lot of power over your life. You could be letting youself in for years and years of trouble.

Fire_Fox

If this flat only has 80 years remaining on the lease you will need to extend before you sell on to get the best price, and you are getting into marriage value territory. I agree with earlier posters - freeholders have a lot of power over leaseholders lives and finances. I would recommend you read the LEASE website inside and out and your own long lease inside and out and familiarise yourself with the rights and responsibilities of both sides.

You will probably need to take an active role in ensuring this place is kept in good condition and that you are not overcharged for services rendered. If you understand the Landlord-Tenant Act 1985 and associated legislation you will be in a much stronger position to deal with the freeholder. At the moment you seem to have a very cavalier attitude to what is a very complex relationship.

gman20_2

ILW wrote: »

Any maintenance issues have to be sorted by the freeholder and they do have a lot of power over your life.

You say that as if they just have to repair things willy-nilly.
There are guidelines and laws in place for this sort of thing, and legally they're not allowed to just let the building get into disrepair.
And while yes, I only own it for 80 years. After 2 years I can apply for a 99 year extension, which again they are legally obliged to accept.
Even with the seemingly inevitable dispute on the cost of the extended lease there's the option of a tribunal.
Also:

(02.02.2009) The price stated to have been paid on 22 January 2009
for the land in this title and in ESX161846 was £72,000.

ESX161846 points to the leasehold on the flat above. Does that mean she purchased the freehold and the leasehold for 72k? That's a better deal than I'm getting. Lol.

gman20_2

Fire_Fox wrote: »

At the moment you seem to have a very cavalier attitude to what is a very complex relationship.

I do understand this, and I haven't even viewed the flat yet (That happens tomorrow).
I would be an idiot to get into this without consulting with a legal professional. And I will read that site through and through if I actually like the flat.
At the moment I'm just asking questions. A few of my answers have been somewhat tongue in cheek (Subwoofer on ceiling).

patricia..xx

be aware that once the length of the lease drops below 80 years you have to pay significnantly more to extend it (this is the "marriage value"). The freeholder has to agree the price so could be hugely unhelpful and like ours try to take us to Tribunal with us paying all their costs.

You may query why someone would do this, but some people are just horrible!

ILW

gman20 wrote: »

You say that as if they just have to repair things willy-nilly.
There are guidelines and laws in place for this sort of thing, and legally they're not allowed to just let the building get into disrepair.
And while yes, I only own it for 80 years. After 2 years I can apply for a 99 year extension, which again they are legally obliged to accept.
Even with the seemingly inevitable dispute on the cost of the extended lease there's the option of a tribunal.
.

This is true, trouble is if you need to go to court every time you get say a roof leak, or trouble with drains it can destroy you financially. Also the lease probably says you are liable for 50% of any repair and maintenance costs a rogue freeholder can have all sorts of fun and games with this if they want to make things difficult for you. I can tell you all of this from personal experience.

gman20_2

patricia..xx wrote: »

be aware that once the length of the lease drops below 80 years you have to pay significnantly more to extend it (this is the "marriage value"). The freeholder has to agree the price so could be hugely unhelpful and like ours try to take us to Tribunal with us paying all their costs.

You may query why someone would do this, but some people are just horrible!

Damn, it would almost certainly incur the marriage value.
It's 80 years now, and I would have to wait 2 years until I could extend the lease. Hmmm.

And thanks ILW, that's something to think about for sure. I don't think she's even releasing the lease documents at the moment. I'll need to talk to the EA about all that.
Looks like she paid 72K for the freehold, with no lender. (Possibly remortgaged?)
I think the reason she's being so hostile is all to do with the amount she has riding on buying that bottom flat. She invested 72K, 6 months ago on the same month as the bottom flat got repo'd
It's clear what she's planning to do, whether she can afford for me to buy the flat is another thing.
£72K for a measly £50 a year ground rent is crazy. She needs this flat a lot more than I do, and if they accept my offer... She's screwed.

All speculation mind you. But if the shoe fits.

Grovester_2

ILW wrote: »

This is true, trouble is if you need to go to court every time you get say a roof leak, or trouble with drains it can destroy you financially. Also the lease probably says you are liable for 50% of any repair and maintenance costs a rogue freeholder can have all sorts of fun and games with this if they want to make things difficult for you. I can tell you all of this from personal experience.

Indeed took us over a year to get our roof patched and they are now dragging their feet over replacement.

gman20_2

Grovester wrote: »

Indeed took us over a year to get our roof patched and they are now dragging their feet over replacement.

Eek. Can you replace a roof then file for a reimbursement?