We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Legal fees reclaimed through service charge
PaulaLW
Posts: 1 Newbie
Hi,
I have recently bought a leasehold flat. Two of the other leaseholderes have breached the terms of their lease by making alterations to the exterior of the building (one putting up a sky dish and the other knocking down walls in his flat).
The freeholder is taking legal action against those leaseholders and has said that any legal costs incurred by him will be charged on to the leaseholders through the service charge provision. Can the freeholder do this? I hadn't even bought the flat when the other leaseholders made the alterations - surely I can't be charged for this?
Any help is appreciaited!
Thanks
I have recently bought a leasehold flat. Two of the other leaseholderes have breached the terms of their lease by making alterations to the exterior of the building (one putting up a sky dish and the other knocking down walls in his flat).
The freeholder is taking legal action against those leaseholders and has said that any legal costs incurred by him will be charged on to the leaseholders through the service charge provision. Can the freeholder do this? I hadn't even bought the flat when the other leaseholders made the alterations - surely I can't be charged for this?
Any help is appreciaited!
Thanks
0
Comments
-
I suspect you will need to check the terms of your lease.0
-
harrys_dad wrote: »I suspect you will need to check the terms of your lease.
And perhaps also make sure the freeholder does!0 -
There should be a clause in the lease setting out who can ultimately enforce the terms of the lease and who is responsible for the costs of doing so.
Unfortunately it tends to say the Freeholder has to enforce the lease but the leaseholder/s are responsible for the cost of doing so.
The fact that you weren't the owner at the time they made the alterations is irrelevent unfortunately, you 'inherit' the property and the lease share warts and all, i.e. if there were service charge arrears you'd be liable for them too once you'd signed on the dotted line.0 -
And don't forget that the freeholder, in enforcing the lease, is acting to protect your interests too. Knocking down walls without permission could create problems for other flat owners if the walls are structural. Usually items in leases about this. I believe it is perfectly right that leaseholders should ask for permission and expect the work to be checked to make sure it has been done properly.0
-
sky dish is patheticDon't put your trust into an Experian score - it is not a number any bank will ever use & it is generally a waste of money to purchase it. They are also selling you insurance you dont need.0
-
In most cases the freeholder/management company can use the service charge to cover expenses - including legal fees.
However I would have expected him to claim the legal fees back from the leaseholders in question.
Certainly if it went to court, the court would normally award costs against the unsecsessful party.0 -
-
Jenniefour wrote: »Agree. Modern day and all that.
Until of course you end up with a cluster of rusty dishes and old cable spaghetti that sky or the installer won't remove, prefering to just pop up a new one.:(Stop! Think. Read the small print. Trust nothing and assume that it is your responsibility. That way it rarely goes wrong.
Actively hunting down the person who invented the imaginary tenure, "share freehold"; if you can show me one I will produce my daughter's unicorn0 -
sky dish is pathetic
I have to agree as they are so common these days. Even when living in a conservation area a Sky dish is normally allowed as long as you abide by the recommendations for siting it.
I can see the sense in objecting to one of the huge satellite dishes some properties have, but the small ones are really quite unobtrusive by comparison.The bigger the bargain, the better I feel.
I should mention that there's only one of me, don't confuse me with others of the same name.0 -
why not just have a shared dish for the propertyDon't put your trust into an Experian score - it is not a number any bank will ever use & it is generally a waste of money to purchase it. They are also selling you insurance you dont need.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards