Grrrrrr solicitors!

SimonMrGreenWard

I'd like the opinion of others as my patience is wearing massively thin. If I'm wrong, it may cheer me up a bit.

Sale agreed flat for vendor. Massively popular spot and they hardly ever come up. Flat is on first floor above clothes shop and has another flat above it too.

Anyhow, as part of the sale, vendor agreed to pay to have lease extended on completion by 90 years (currently 68 years remain).

Had freeholders sols draft lease extension. (to which they sneakily put in that the new owner was to assume control over communal area of both flats.) Buyers sols not happy, understandably. I went to buyers sols and asked that if we get the communal area assigned as 50/50 responsiblity between both flats, would she be happy? She said yes. I asked if there were any other issues with the lease that would affect us exchanging once this was done. She said no.

Got freeholders sols to re-draft lease, send out copy to the other flat owner and have it all signed off etc.

That's all now done, but buyers sols have now come back and said that they're not happy with both flats being 50% responsible for the building with the freeholder not contributing out of rent on shop.

My main problem is as to why this has not been mentioned before? Why my vendor is now significantly out of pocket for a part in the lease that has always been there and wasn't previously a problem.

I told everyone on day one that it's 50/50 between the two flats for maintenance, they've all seen the lease. Why oh why has everyone spent so much money when this problem could have been identified on day one? So frustrating.

Bananamana

I don't understand- you're angry at the buyer's solicitor because the buyer won't accept a 50/50 responsilbiity for a communal area?

What was the previous arrangement for maintenance of the communal area?

Does the freeholder (who i presume owns the shop) use the communal parts?

What type of area is it- is it just a staircase?

This is an obviously complicated situation as you have to consider the effect of the changes on all 3 leases.

G_M

Bit confused. I THINK you are the buyer but referring to 'the buyer' and 'the buyer's solicitor' raises doubts. You also refer to 'my vendor' so you can't be the vendor. Who are you?

Surely this is all up to the vendor. Buyer wants lease extended before buying. Vendor should extend lease or lose the sale.

Simple.

Bananamana

i would guess the vendor's agent

SimonMrGreenWard

Sorry, don't think I've made this very clear whatsoever.

I'm agent selling it.

• Vendor having lease extended
• Slight problem with rewording on lease
• Had it sorted
• Buyers sols now decided not happy with maintenance setup. (This has not changed whatsoever and has never mentioned it being a problem when queried previously)

If it REALLY was an issue, buyer could have pulled out after first viewing when I told them the sketch with maintenance, or alternatively when I asked buyers sols if there was anything they weren't happy with in lease before having it extended, and then again when they wanted changes to it.

I don't have an issue with them having a problem, but more their timing of bringing it up. They've known all along that it was setup this way.

betmunch

I think the issue is the buyer isnt it?

Why would the solicitors change to wording in the original lease unless the buyer instructed them to do so?

Is the buyer a naive FTB? OR a wily investor that has spoted a chance to gain a sneaky bit of value?

SimonMrGreenWard

betmunch wrote: »

I think the issue is the buyer isnt it?

Why would the solicitors change to wording in the original lease unless the buyer instructed them to do so?

Is the buyer a naive FTB? OR a wily investor that has spoted a chance to gain a sneaky bit of value?

It was actually the freeholder who sneakily tried changing the terms of the lease when drafting the extension! Buyers sols had to have it changed back, and then tried going a step further to have it changed back.

Buyer knows what he's doing, no doubt about that.

DVardysShadow

Does shop even use the communal area? If not, Buyer should be be told firmly,

But I agree, freeholder has caused needless hassle - if the lease was right in the first place, then buyer would have had a lot less standing to comment.

Bananamana

What is the communal area? If its just a stairway as I suspect then 50/50 maintenance is probably going to be in the region of £5 every 5 years for some paint (maybe...)
and the odd hoovering. If the freeholder doesnt use it (and it sounds like they would have access through the shop so probably wouldn't) then what's the problem in the two tenants paying.

This sounds like a waste of money all round - mostly in legal fees...

SimonMrGreenWard

All sorted now. Buyer proceeding.

betmunch

Did you have to apply a heavy dose of "dont be so f**king stupid" to them?