Pets in leasehold with share of freehold

AnotherJoe

eddddy wrote: »

So in legal terms, it's fairly straightforward. During the selling process, the company (i.e. the freeholder) gives your buyer written permission to keep a dog.


But from a practical perspective, your buyer will be walking straight into a hostile situation - with the possibility of neighbour disputes, disputes between joint freeholders etc.

If I was the buyer, and I realised the situation, I would walk away.

The buyer may have little choice since most leases won't allow amd in this case there is a way she will be allowed.

As said by others OP needs to point out to dim third party that when the new owner comes in they will not be voting against themself.

Hoploz

Company owns freehold / decisions made by majority vote. That's it then. Your solicitor should agree that this is the case when stated in this way.

Your buyer is very silly not to have thought of this at the very first stage. It is a standard clause in leasehold properties that pets are either not allowed, or permission must be sought. Especially if it is a dog they have - other pets which are less noticeable such as rodents or even cats you might get away with but not a dog! They are only likely to avoid this by buying freehold, so if they walk away they will have to bear this in mind for their eventual purchase.

Cornucopia

I would have thought that the remedy is to require the Secretary to call an EGM, and then to vote on the matter. Obviously, the OP would need to ensure that all three Leaseholders can make the date (although being only three of them, the meeting could probably not take place if one were absent).

Alternatively, just let it run on to enforcement, and when the time comes, the then other leaseholders can vote down anything more than a request for the OP's buyer to obtain permission.

Nick_C

Just on the issue of how much of a vote you have, this would not normally be linked to what percentage of the service charges you are responsible for. Often the service charge will be linked to the number of rooms in the property or the size of the property, but each leaseholder will hold a single share in the management company and all leaseholders will have one vote at meetings.

Nick_C

Also, is the Secretary the only officer of the company? Not good practice for one person to make decisions without consulting any other residents.

The Secretary needs to ensure that statutory returns are made promptly, although all directors share this responsibility.

G_M

Whatever the legal rights, would a buyer want to live in a 3 flat property, where there is conflict with one of the flat-owners from the start?

If that flat-owner hates dogs, or dogs in flats, then neighbour relations are not going to be good.

and nor are meetings of the freehold company.

Giblets

Thanks for the advice, ironically she doesn't even live there, but rents out the flat! So it's not like she would need to see her everyday

Hoploz

Ah well perhaps that is why - she doesn't want her tenants to have the idea of having a dog in her property, if other flats do. It's all about her tenancy agreement obvs, but she may feel her tenants might try and wing it if other dogs are about.

eddddy

Giblets wrote: »

Thanks for the advice, ironically she doesn't even live there, but rents out the flat! So it's not like she would need to see her everyday

But even so, I'm not sure I would spend hundreds of thousands of pounds buying my way into a neighbour dispute or joint freeholder dispute - even if I never saw the other party.

But maybe some people would.

Giblets

Hi all,
a little update, but apparently her grounds for claiming I would not be able to vote ont he dog issue is because I have a direct conflict of interest. Although her conflict of interest is that it could affect her rental income.

Incidentally, I have read my leasehold agreement...:
"The leasee shall not underlet the premises or any part thereof"

Does that mean that you may not rent out your property?