Share of Freehold - changes to lease

Lunarchy

Hello,

I live in a house converted in 2 one-bedroom flats. I own flat B and share the freehold with my neighbours in flat A.

My neighbours added a door and a window (without my consent - long story) to the walls of their flat so that they could add an extra bedroom. I did write to them and asked them to reverse the works but they refused, and I could not sustain the legal costs to take them to court.

They are now selling their flat and marketing their property as a 2 bedroom flat. My question is: are they able to amend their lease from a one-bedroom to a two-bedroom flat without my consent?

Many thanks for your help

Hoploz

I'd say not ... But I'm no expert ... But what difference does it actually make anyway what their layout is?

eddddy

What is your goal? Are you wanting your neighbours to pay you for allowing a change in the lease?

Or do you think their alterations have devalued your flat in some way?

Either way, you need to see what it says in their lease about alterations - to see if they've breached a covenant, or if they need the freeholders' consent.

If they've breached a covenant or need consent, the sale probably won't happen until the matter is resolved.

Lunarchy

eddddy wrote: »

What is your goal? Are you wanting your neighbours to pay you for allowing a change in the lease?

Or do you think their alterations have devalued your flat in some way?

Either way, you need to see what it says in their lease about alterations - to see if they've breached a covenant, or if they need the freeholders' consent.

If they've breached a covenant or need consent, the sale probably won't happen until the matter is resolved.

To cut a long story short: I had asked them if I could convert the loft - they had said it was not a problem at all, actually it was a great idea! But that I had to agree to structural alterations to their flat. Of course I agreed. Problem is nothing had been written, it was only a verbal agreement. I know, could have not been more stupid. So as soon as they finished their works to the exterior walls and roof (only took them a couple of weeks) I had my drawings for planning permission, but before submitting them I asked my neighbours if my solicitor could contact theirs to amend the lease and demise the loft to my property. At that point my neighbours said to me that they regretted but after careful consideration they had realised that they no longer wanted me to go ahead with the loft conversion! And of course not only I lost money to the architect but also to a solicitor just to hear that because I had not intervened whilst the works had been carried out I had no chance of asking them to reinstate the property as it was previously.

All the above said, I am now looking for ways of getting the loft negotiation back into the agenda before they sell the flat, or at least make things a little harder for them after the way they behaved!

AdrianC

Oh, right. Petty retaliation.

The difference is, of course, that you were trying to get previously common area handed over to exclusively you - which may increase later (shared) maintenance costs - whereas their work doesn't affect you at all.

Lunarchy

Thanks AdrianC,I actually have lost money and sanity beacuse of their behaviour, so I dont think it's petty at all. In any case, we don't share the loft as I'm the only one who has acces to it, I wouldnt take anything away from them. Why do you say their costs would increase? I would have taken the entire freehold of the roof and therefore the costs of mantaining it. I'm really interested in your view, thank you.

AdrianC

Lunarchy wrote: »

I actually have lost money and sanity beacuse of their behaviour, so I dont think it's petty at all.

It is petty, because your retribution in this is purely because you think you've been wronged over a completely separate incident.

In any case, we don't share the loft as I'm the only one who has acces to it

You miss my point. What if the roof needed some internal maintenance? As it is now, any work is straightforward. With the roof converted, it is not.

I would have taken the entire freehold of the roof and therefore the costs of mantaining it.

The maintenance costs wouldn't be paid by the freeholder, then shared between the two leaseholders? If that is so, then obviously that cease to be relevant.

But in attempting to gain some kind of retribution for the earlier perceived slight - yes, you are being petty.

Hoploz

Perhaps the new owners will be more open to your loft conversion plan ... Good that they're selling - it gives you a second chance.

Of course, they have carried out work without written permission of the joint freeholder, so in doing so this could jeopardise their sale, or at least cause a bit of a sticking point to be resolved. If the EA were to find out then they would be obliged to pass this info to a potential buyer ....

You want them to go though, right?

eddddy

Except that the seller has to fill in the Leasehold Information Form TA7...

9. Alterations
9.1 Is the seller aware of any alterations having been made to the property
since the lease was originally granted?

9.2 Please give details of these alterations:

9.3 Was the landlord's consent for the alterations obtained? If Yes, please supply a copy.

And the joint freeholders have to complete a management pack which might include questions like:

CONSENT TO ALTERATIONS:
15.1: Are you aware of any Alterations having taken place at the property and
15.2 If yes, describe the Alterations and
15.3 Confirm that consent for alterations was obtained for alterations.

And the buyer's solicitor will check these forms and advise the buyer and their mortgage company...

So it's unlikely the sale will happen without consents in place.

Lunarchy

Thank you Hoploz and Eddddy that's really useful info!

Lunarchy

AdrianC wrote: »

You miss my point. What if the roof needed some internal maintenance? As it is now, any work is straightforward. With the roof converted, it is not.


The maintenance costs wouldn't be paid by the freeholder, then shared between the two leaseholders? If that is so, then obviously that cease to be relevant.

As I mentioned before, by converting the loft I would take full responsibility of the maintenance of the roof, which means that from that moment I would be solely responsible for the FULL maintenance of the roof.

On the other hand the structural works that they carried out do effect me, as they refused to amend the lease to state that they will now be solely responsible for that part of the roof and walls, and they also refused to appoint a structural engineer to check that the works they had carried out were safe - which means that if there is any leakage in their extension roof because of their Velux window or any collapsing of the walls due to the door and window they have installed without my permission, myself and my insurance would still be responsible for it.

AdrianC wrote: »

But in attempting to gain some kind of retribution for the earlier perceived slight - yes, you are being petty.

I think you miss my point. I am trying to be in a favourable position to make them agree again to sell me the loft. I don't think this is petty at all. And they wouldn't just "hand over to me" the space, they would sell it to me at the fair price agreed by an independent surveyor.