flat purchase does not include loft

debsinbrighton

Hi,

we're in the process of buying a top-floor leasehold flat for £205,000.

when we viewed the property, one of the 'selling points' mentioned by the estate agent was the possibility of doing a loft-conversion. He told us that the seller had already had planning permission to do this.

Now our solicitor is in the process of looking at the lease documents, and has pointed out that our flat does not actually own the loft space. This is owned by the freeholder, and our flat has access to it for storage purposes only.

We do still want to buy the flat, as the possibility of converting the loft was a bonus and not our only reason for buying it. However, do you think we have grounds to reduce our offer as a result of this? Presumably the property is worth less if it doesn't include the loft?

Also, we plan to organise our own survey. Should we organise the survey now and try to renegotiate the price based on the loft issue and any problems that are highlighted? Or is it better to sort this issue out before we organise the survey (on the grounds that if the vendor knows we have paid out for a survey, they'll think we are less likely to walk away if they refuse to negotiate)?

Thanks!

Richard_Webster

The freeholder may well charge you a significant amount to add the loft to the leased area so you would certainly need to reduce your offer to take that factor into account.

goldbyron

Okay just to be clear - does the freeholder 'own the loft in the extent that any permissions would also have to be granted by them. Or does it mean they actually own it? Freeholders are meant to own the land the property is on not the physical building although any alterations need to be permitted by the FH usually at a small cost. I would ask if the FH can give permission now for any conversion subject to plans.

ILW

goldbyron wrote: »

Okay just to be clear - does the freeholder 'own the loft in the extent that any permissions would also have to be granted by them. Or does it mean they actually own it? Freeholders are meant to own the land the property is on not the physical building although any alterations need to be permitted by the FH usually at a small cost. I would ask if the FH can give permission now for any conversion subject to plans.

The freeholder does own the building. In fact all a leaseholder buys is the right to stay in the property for a fixed term. A lease is basically a long term rental, nothing more.

Doozergirl

I think value really depends on you here. It's quite a personal thing. Have they added a premium for the loft potential? Sometimes people do add premiums for PP for extensions but it doesn't in reality add any value. I'd expect to pay the same for a house with PP for an extension as one without it.

Did you really want to extend the loft? You might be prepared to pay more than the going rate for a similar property if it was quite unique in it's potential. Otherwise it's worth the same as any other similar sized flat to you.

It's totally subjective. There's no rule book.

debsinbrighton

Erm, I think the freeholder actually owns the loft itself, from what my solicitor told me. We would just have the right to access it and use it for storage purposes. Apparently in the past the loft held water tanks for both flats (now they have their own boilers) so this was why it was owned by the freeholder.

Thanks for your replies - the loft-conversion was a nice idea for the future, which might have remained just that anyway.

goldbyron

ILW wrote: »

The freeholder does own the building. In fact all a leaseholder buys is the right to stay in the property for a fixed term. A lease is basically a long term rental, nothing more.

Sorry you are right although I thought the FH owned the structure of the building and not anything within the walls itself making the issue of a loft difficult to pinpoint what the FH actually owns. Would the FH be responsible for the water tanks or problems with the floorboards in the area - or indeed for putting in insulation. I know the FH is responsible for the roof but the parts inside - its so complicated and I absolutely hate FH properties. Just sold one and it will be my last!

GDB2222

"one of the 'selling points' mentioned by the estate agent was the possibility of doing a loft-conversion. He told us that the seller had already had planning permission to do this"

That's a really significant issue. I would suggest a pretty drastic reduction as that now turns out to be wrong.

It's also a significantly misleading description, and hence an offence under the Property Misdescriptions Act 1991. If your purchase falls through and you have wasted costs, you should report the EA to trading standards, who may well prosecute them.

Jowo_2

So has your solicitor verified that planning permission is in place? (although I can't see how if the leaseholder doesn't actually have this part of the property on their deeds...)

debsinbrighton

So, would it be the case with all leaseholder flats that the freeholder owns the loft space? Or does it depend on what is written in the lease?
If this is the case for all leasehold flats, then it is probably our fault for not understanding this, as we were aware the flat was leasehold.

I'm not sure whether we could report the EA in either case, as they told us this verbally when we viewed the property and there is nothing in writing. The information on rightmove said 'access to useful loft above'.

debsinbrighton

Jowo - he has confirmed that there was planning permission, which has now expired. However, he states that this came from the local council and not the freeholder. Apparently this was applied for by the previous occupier to the current seller, who decided not to do the conversion after all (perhaps when he discovered that he didn't have the right to do it....?)