Flying Freehold

bertha9796

I am mid-way through the purchase (hopefully !!??) of a 1900's stone built terraced house which includes an archway (flying freehold) into a courtyard featuring a number of other properties. Built over this archway is my 2nd bedroom and also a room owned by an adjacent attached property.

The lender is happy to progress as the area of the flying freehold is <20% of the total area, the insurance company is happy or at least they haven't raised this as a concern, this was arranged by the lender.

However the conveyancer has raised a number of issues relating to righst of support although the way this was described this was a physcical brick v stone issues rather than contractual principle.

Is the conveyancer raising this as a general issues from the perspective of the lender, the insurer, themselves or myself ? Do I have to take their advice or just note it and progress ? Is this a showstopper ?

Any comments or advice would be greatly appreciated and will being down the stress and panic levels ! - thanks !!

Richard_Webster

I assume that the freehold of the passageway under the arch belongs to someone else, or you only own half its width and not the whole area under your room.

The wall on the other side of the passageway that supports your first floor room will presumably belong to the owner of the house on the other side of the passageway. There is no general obligation for neighbouring freeholders (just because they are neighbours) to take positive action to maintain their property so in time the wall's condition could deteriorate and support for your room would then be threatened. There has to be a deed entered into by all the people involved each time a property changes hands, otherwise the maintenance obligation is not enforceable for freehold properties. (This is why flats are generally leasehold, because having a landlord/tenant relationship removes the need for this cumbersome procedure.)

The problem with this is that you become reliant on others when you want to sell and if they cannot be found or refuse to sign for one reason or another you have a problem. In most cases there is no enforceable obligation for them to enter into such a deed in the first place.

Generally it is easier to take out indemnity insurance which would pay out in the unlikely event of the property losing value because of the neighbour's lack of maintenance and the inability to take any enforcement action.

In practice the problem is more theoretical than real as the kind of structural failure contemplated rarely actually happens because people generally use their common sense and most people want to keep their own property in good order so the likelihood of the neighbour's wall failing will be very small.

bertha9796

Hello Richard

That is really useful. The other challenge in fact it's probably the same one is that the roof over the arch is shared between the two properties - my room at the front and the other owner's at the rear - is this part of the same problem or something else all together ?

The conveyancer (not a solicitor) seems to have a real issue with this including the fact the the roof line for these rooms is set lower that the main roof-line - not sure why this should be an issue ??

On a scale of 1-10 how big a problem is this ? (1 being no problem)