Sale fallen through due to freeholder not supplying buildings insurance

Voyager2002

WGHB77 wrote: »

Thank you for your reply. Yes, I believe that is all that was/is required but the freeholder has not done this after been asked. He said he doesn't really want to get involved and doesn't want his insurance policy being passed around solicitors?

There is a simple solution: pop back with a digital camera (perhaps on your mobile) and photograph the insurance.

I can understand why your number does not wish to part with the original of his insurance policy, and presumably he has just not got round to making a photo-copy: after all, that is extra admin for him but for no benefit.

csgohan4

Offer to cover his admin fees.


however wouldn't your house insurance cover the outbuilding i.e garage?

Richard_Webster

Problem is that some builders construct alregely frehold house developments but as part of the design incorporate so called coach houses with garages underneath. If there are no ordinary blocks of flats it it too much trouble setting up continuing management arrangements just to deal with insurance and repairs that might only be needed in 20+ years time. So they make the coach house owner the freeholder of the garages and the poor soul has no idea that he is a landlord and that carries responsibilities - so he doesn't know what to do and can react in this kind of way.

So this kind of issue is one that can occur with this sort of set up and anyone biuying a house with a leasehold garage under a coach house should be told about the risk.

csgohan4

Richard_Webster wrote: »

Problem is that some builders construct alregely frehold house developments but as part of the design incorporate so called coach houses with garages underneath. If there are no ordinary blocks of flats it it too much trouble setting up continuing management arrangements just to deal with insurance and repairs that might only be needed in 20+ years time. So they make the coach house owner the freeholder of the garages and the poor soul has no idea that he is a landlord and that carries responsibilities - so he doesn't know what to do and can react in this kind of way.

So this kind of issue is one that can occur with this sort of set up and anyone biuying a house with a leasehold garage under a coach house should be told about the risk.

My garage is exactly the same, however the freeholder is a management company. The deeds say I must have garage insurance as part of the house insurance rather than them.

Richard_Webster

My garage is exactly the same, however the freeholder is a management company. The deeds say I must have garage insurance as part of the house insurance rather than them.

That's another way of doing it - you will make sure you insure but how do you know the rest if the building comprising the coach house and garages will be insured? if there is a fire or some other insurance event occurring there could be problems sorting out who pays.

The safest method - but not usually the cheapest - is for the management company to insure and charge the cost as part of a service charge. The dpownside is that there are usually associated (sometimes disproportionately high) admin costs, especially when house with leasehold garage changes hands.

WGHB77

BrassicWoman wrote: »

do you financially contribute to his cost of insuring your garage?

The lease states that I am to pay on demand 16.66% of the freeholders insurance premium. After speaking with the freeholder, he decides not to demand this payment (not worried about demanding a small amount).


When I purchased the property, my solicitor did not even make me aware of this, hence why I didn't understand when all this came up.

WGHB77

Voyager2002 wrote: »

There is a simple solution: pop back with a digital camera (perhaps on your mobile) and photograph the insurance.

I can understand why your number does not wish to part with the original of his insurance policy, and presumably he has just not got round to making a photo-copy: after all, that is extra admin for him but for no benefit.

We feel this simple solution has cost us the house sale. I have not asked for his original documents, only a copy. I offered him a 'good drink' for doing it for us but he said it wasn't about that. As far as I now understand, the freeholder has to supply this information?

WGHB77

Richard_Webster wrote: »

Problem is that some builders construct alregely frehold house developments but as part of the design incorporate so called coach houses with garages underneath. If there are no ordinary blocks of flats it it too much trouble setting up continuing management arrangements just to deal with insurance and repairs that might only be needed in 20+ years time. So they make the coach house owner the freeholder of the garages and the poor soul has no idea that he is a landlord and that carries responsibilities - so he doesn't know what to do and can react in this kind of way.

So this kind of issue is one that can occur with this sort of set up and anyone biuying a house with a leasehold garage under a coach house should be told about the risk.

As far as I am aware, the freeholder fully understands the situation. One of my worries when approaching him was that he didn't know anything about it. When he confirmed he knew all about it I thought it would be a simple case of him supplying a copy of the building insurance, but he hasn't.

HappyMJ

csgohan4 wrote: »

Offer to cover his admin fees.


however wouldn't your house insurance cover the outbuilding i.e garage?

An outbuilding on your own freehold property yes. A leasehold garage as part of someone else's building no. The freeholder of the building needs to provide insurance and request a contribution from the leaseholder.

HappyMJ

I would just say the garage is not insured and see what the buyer's solicitor says about that.

It's not legally compulsory to purchase buildings insurance on a property. You should do it and a mortgage may require you to have a policy in place but it's not legally required.

I don't have it on my property so any request from my neighbours would be answered "there is no buildings insurance". What can they then do? Nothing. Does that mean they could never sell the property?