Freehold....BBC this morning

[Deleted User]

Rosemary7391 wrote: »

It states in my deeds that I'm responsible for 1/8 of the cost of common repairs, and that they're common if more than half of the 8 flats agree so. I think that there is also a default set of arrangements in Scottish law if the deeds don't say anything.

Ah ok so there is something in place, not just a free for all where the those who shout loudest or strongest negotiators win.

deFoix

A classic cogent extract from Lord Neuberger from the Supreme Court case linked earlier:

"Experience shows that it is by no means unknown for people to enter into arrangements which are ill-advised, even ignoring the benefit of wisdom of hindsight, and it is not the function of a court when interpreting an agreement to relieve a party from the consequences of his imprudence or poor advice. Accordingly, when interpreting a contract a judge should avoid re-writing it in an attempt to assist an unwise party or to penalise an astute party."

In other words: Don't agree terms you don't fully understand.

davidmcn

BBH123 wrote: »

But in your scenrio why would they challenge the roof being done, they would just let it be done and not pay ?

I don't know why they would, it was you who raised the possibility of legal action delaying the repairs being done in the first place! In reality if the repairs are urgent then they'll be done and the costs sorted out afterwards. The possibility of someone not paying their share is why there's a means of ensuring that the costs can be recouped at the very least when their flat is next sold.

[Deleted User]

Boler1985 wrote: »

A classic cogent extract from Lord Neuberger from the Supreme Court case linked earlier:

"Experience shows that it is by no means unknown for people to enter into arrangements which are ill-advised, even ignoring the benefit of wisdom of hindsight, and it is not the function of a court when interpreting an agreement to relieve a party from the consequences of his imprudence or poor advice. Accordingly, when interpreting a contract a judge should avoid re-writing it in an attempt to assist an unwise party or to penalise an astute party."

In other words: Don't agree terms you don't fully understand.

Yes ignorance is no defence