First time buyer query

Littleraindrops

Haha this what I'm trying to find out! I said to my partner - are they expecting to come over for dinner?!

They've stated that all keys will be handed over upon completion so obviously they wouldn't have access that way, and we would have all locks changed (we were going to have this done anyway as you never know who could have a key as people are renting it at the moment and I'm pregnant and want to be safe). Which also raises the question how would they have access - would they then want our contact details to arrange access? Surely we can refuse to give those details?

[Deleted User]

I'd be concerned that they're going to leave stuff behind they want to 'access' - is there a loft, or some other storage area? Have you made sure they're going to clear these areas out when they leave?

What an odd clause. If they won't sell without it.. sell, then get a restraining order on them!

Hoploz

Perhaps they are asking for access to the ground around it or something, rather than the building itself?

Are they selling to you all their interest in the property? Just wondering whether they are selling you a flat and retaining the leasehold, or something like that? In which case they may require access for maintenance or something?

Edit: Sorry I meant retain the FREEhold!

hazyjo

davidmcn wrote: »

The OP doesn't say that their solicitor hasn't given them similar advice to us! Though if not, I'm wondering if the OP has possibly misunderstood something, given how bizarre both conditions sound.

Granted, although I maybe misunderstood the wording to mean that they had found the clause in what they read and had been asked to sign, not what the solicitor had told them. Maybe I misinterpreted...


Jx

cashbackproblems

Hoploz wrote: »

Perhaps they are asking for access to the ground around it or something, rather than the building itself?

Are they selling to you all their interest in the property? Just wondering whether they are selling you a flat and retaining the leasehold, or something like that? In which case they may require access for maintenance or something?

why/how could they retain the leasehold :think:

only valid reasons would be if they own the freehold or need access to the grounds as mentioned.

Even then doesn't sound like a good purchase, get out before you waste any more time/money

Hoploz

Well we don't have the full background - perhaps the seller owns the whole building, and has divided it into flats to each be sold leasehold? Or it's one of those where a house been divided into two, the owner lives on one floor and has sold the other floor off ... Just trying to think of any kind of feasible explanations for what appears on the face of it to be a totally bizarre and unreasonable request.

Just spotted I wrote retain the leasehold when I meant retain the freehold in my other post - which makes much more sense!

Littleraindrops

Hi everyone - spoke to my solicitor who is now working on having this removed from our contract. He had no answers as to why they wanted access and also had no answers as to why he had this information since APRIL, let us pay for searches to be done etc before telling us about it!
Will keep updated on the progress!

NeverAgain2

I suspect there's a body under the floorboards

AnotherJoe

There was a similar post maybe six months ago, a guy who had been living for many years in the house he was selling wanted a clause which gave him first call should they sell in future, this condition to hold indefinitely. The OP said the EAs and solicitor had told him this was a bad idea but he insisted.
The OP insisted clause came out or sale was off. Clause came out.
The clause your seller wants is IMO far worse unless there is a mitigating factor such as ... No strike that it's just far worse.

You should do the same.