Absent freeholder - indemnity policy for building works?

MoneySpendingLoser

We are selling our flat and have an absent freeholder. We are getting a £700 indemnity policy for our buyer, which is fine. We have 980 yr lease if that’s relevant.
While we were in the flat we knocked a wall down (have building regs ect, all fine). But they are now asking for a separate £300 indemnity policy to because we were unable to get the freeholder’s permission to do the building work. Our solicitor says this is over the top and we are challenging it.
Just wondered if you guys through this is was excessive. Don’t want to hold up the sale if getting this extra policy is pretty standard? Thanks

marksoton

How can they be absent? Presumably you pay ground rent/service charges and the lease states who the freeholder is?

Is the freeholder still not aware you've altered the structure?

I don't think your buyer is over the top one bit...

MoneySpendingLoser

We have no details of the freeholder. We pay ground rent into a bank account, details of which we were given by the previous owner as being the account the she paid her ground rent into.

The guy in the one other flat in the house does the same. He's been there for 15 years and has never been able to track down the freeholder either. We think the freeholder may be dead.

MoneySpendingLoser

Just to add, we are very happy to buy the first indemnity policy. We just wondered if an extra one was standard in this situation? Our solicitor thought the extra one was excessive. Think we will probably pay just to get the sale moving if it’s a fair enough request. Thanks