Deed of variation queries

Loulou260683

Hi

Was looking for some advice, I am a FTB buyer and have had an offer accepted on a first floor maisonette. I have my mortgage sorted, searches complete, there is just a problem with the lease. My solicitor has raised a query with the lease and requested a deed of variation. It is to do with there is nowhere in the lease that the ground floor property are required to maintain their foundations. The EA has informed me that the freehold management company are not willing to put this in the deed of variation. He however is still convinced it will be sorted and this property will be mine. I can't speak to my solicitor about this at the moment as he has gone on holiday for 1month (without so much as a please deal with ??? in my absence) and left a replacement who is very rude and unhelpful.
Anybody had similar problems, or any opinions if this will exchange or not?
Thanks

Richard_Webster

Ignore EA - this is a legal matter he won't understand ad shouldn't be giving you advice about.

Insist your stand in solicitor gives you coherent answers. Put the request in witting. Phone calls get forgotten and are not generally recorded.

You either need a deed of variation or possibly your lender might accept a maisonette indemnity policy instead - this could cost from about £200 up depending on the value of the property and would pay out if you suffered loss as a result of being unable to secure the repair of other parts of the property because of wording defects.

The seller should pay for either the deed or the policy. The policy is cheaper and quicker, but you will probably need to take out another policy when you sell and not all lenders will accept them.

propertyman

But its likely in the FH companies interest to get the GFF owner to assume responsibility, as subject to below, the obligation falls to them ( as they have not granted and the owner had not agreed to take, the obligation to repair when the lease was granted lease, to look after them).

It would be an unusual situation where the lease was poorly worded so that the foundations are the GFF owner's but omits the responsibility to repair and that it would not fall on the FH company to deal with.