Roof repairs organised by neighbour - who is liable?

rm_82

No requirement to have a factor in the deeds (it's an old tenement, not a new build). One of the neighbours tried to set up something similar through the Council's Stair Partnership scheme a while back, but didn't get majority support, so it didn't go ahead (A cost-related decision, I think). Shame, it would have been very useful now!

Stair lighting is covered in our Council Tax I think, and cleaning by the residents (there's a few of us who take a turn).

Will have a closer look at that Shelter link tomorrow, looks like there's some good stuff in there, thank you!

Jaynne

It all sounds a bit odd to me. How are you to know if the work on the roof was really necessary since it was done without you being able to inspect/get other quotes? I would be very suspicious that the work was mearly something desirable or it provided most of the benefit to the top floor flat that was being bought. After all if it was essential then the seller could have either got a statuatory notice or knocked the price down a little and have the buyer get it after purchase.

I don't see you being liable for work done without your knowledge and without a statuatory notice and the seller should simply chalk this up as a cost of selling. Could citizens advise perhaps help you out?

exprog

(a) Alleged corruption re Edinburgh council is notorious. How can you not know? Oh wait, wasn't there also something about the local press in Edinburgh?

(b) Make an appointment with Citizens Advice.

(c) Inform the other tenants that you are seking advice and suggest they also wait for that.

(d) Don't spend any money on anything else until you have more advice about your legal position.

paddy's_mum

I agree with a great deal of what has been said in this thread but I return to one point and it is this.

If the work that was done was, in fact, also to the benefit of the other owners - with or without their knowledge and/or consent, and assuming done to a competent standard - is there not a moral obligation to cough up a fair share of the costs?

I'm of the view that if this ever got to a court, the judge would be looking at not only the bare bones of law and rights but also at natural justice. Okay, the former owner made a mistake and went about it the wrong way but that doesn't erase the fact that an advantage has been bestowed upon all the other owners.

Just my thoughts.

Jaynne

paddy's_mum wrote: »

I agree with a great deal of what has been said in this thread but I return to one point and it is this.

If the work that was done was, in fact, also to the benefit of the other owners - with or without their knowledge and/or consent, and assuming done to a competent standard - is there not a moral obligation to cough up a fair share of the costs?

I'm of the view that if this ever got to a court, the judge would be looking at not only the bare bones of law and rights but also at natural justice. Okay, the former owner made a mistake and went about it the wrong way but that doesn't erase the fact that an advantage has been bestowed upon all the other owners.

Just my thoughts.

The way this has been gone about is to me down right suspicious. The seller did a lot of work on behalf of everyone without even sticking a note through their door? The buyer is builder and insisted on it? How does the op know that the work was necessary, well priced or not just going to the buyers mate? I don't think you have a moral duty to be ripped off and you should be very suspicious under the circumstances.

rm_82

Wow, thanks all - some great stuff here.

Definitely think a trip to CAB is a good call whilst waiting for the Council to revert back with their side of things.

To be clear, I'd happily pay my share of a genuine repair - had there been a leak above my flat, I would have been looking for everyone to pay their share too. However, had it been me, I would have informed the other residents about any planned work and got their buy-in before going ahead with a costly repair, if I couldn't get the Council to manage it through a Stat Notice. It's the way that it's all been handled that is ringing warning bells for me and the others in the stair.

Trying to be objective, I can see why (if he is genuine) he's gone about it in this way; picture the scene...

- Flat has been on the market a while
- Prospective buyer comes along, and makes an offer subject to survey
- Survey finds roof repair work is needing done
- Buyer says they won't buy unless work is carried out by the vendor
- Vendor tries to get council to action work on his behalf, they won't
- Vendor worries he will lose the sale if he delays, so takes a risk and goes ahead (rightly or wrongly) without consulting other residents
- Vendor knows roof is a communal responsibility, so asks other residents for their share of the bill when it comes in.

...and here we are.

Not sure how we will ever know for sure if the work was essential without access to a survey - might give the new neighbour a try and see if he is feeling co-operative, as I presume that's how all this could have started. (and if there is no survey saying the work needed done for the good of the building, old neighbour can take a hike!)

jennifernil

Is the roof a communal responsibility? Do your title deeds apportion ownership of various parts of the building, or are they silent? That's the first thing to check.

Even though there is no requirement in the deeds to appoint a factor, you can still do that, but as you say, there is a cost involved. Our daughter pays £25 per quarter for their factor (plus bills of course).

I haven't heard of stair lighting being included in CT, does that mean the building was originally owned by the council? Are all the flats owner occupied now?

Speaking to the new owner could shed some light on the previous state of the roof. What work was done according to the quote?

You need to see a receipted invoice, not just the quote. Check out the firm who did the work, ask for any written guarantees and so on.

I would be getting some legal advice. Do you, or even one of the other owners, have legal expenses cover in your household insurance?

jennifernil

According to this......

http://scotland.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/advice_topics/repairs_and_bad_conditions/repairs_and_maintenance_in_common_areas/making_decisions_using_the_tenement_management_scheme

the owner should have put the work to a vote and only gone ahead if a majority were in favour. The work can be authorised retrospectively and owners agree to pay, but only in the case of emergency repairs is any one owner actually authorised to instruct repairs and bill the others for a share.

Owners can only be expected to contribute to repairs and maintenance, not improvements, so it would depend on exactly what work was done.

DaftyDuck

There seems to be an important bit of your original post that hasn't got the attention it deserves...

Firstly... There is no legal obligation for you to pay - he should have gone through the correct procedure before the work was carried out. You had no input into the decision of whether the work was needed, or who should do it. He has no input of your cash. Simples.

Secondly... To me, more importantly, there is absolutely no moral obligation to pay either.... IF the following quotation from your original O.P. reflects the "true" situation (I don't mean that inflammatory-like, just if it is, it is, ....)
"....he had undertaken repairs to the roof in order to seal the sale of the flat to the new owner". OK, so you'll contribute to the cost, if he'll dosh out a portion of his sale proceeds.

No, he did the work to directly profit from the work. Now he's asking for you to pay for it. Wonder if he's asking the purchaser of his old property to cough up too.... He sounds like a cheeky little monkey to me, and I'd politely say I wouldn't pay. I'd advise all the other tenants of the views in this thread too, hoping all stand together.

rm_82

jennifernil wrote: »

Is the roof a communal responsibility? Do your title deeds apportion ownership of various parts of the building, or are they silent? That's the first thing to check.

Checked the deeds - all residents of the building are jointly responsible for the roof (and other common parts, like the stairwell, door, garden) as a whole - not individual areas allocated to specific flats.

jennifernil wrote: »

I haven't heard of stair lighting being included in CT, does that mean the building was originally owned by the council? Are all the flats owner occupied now?

As far as I know, all flats in the stair are privately owned, and one or two of these are rented. Not sure how the stair lighting system works, but I know the council are responsible for it, they have fixed a problem once before - so I guess it is paid for by Council Tax?

Awaiting a call back from CAB, which should be tonight. Will let you know what they have to say!