Can I be penalised for property alterations I did not make?

CuriousA`

Hi, I would appreciate some advice please about the position my partner has found himself in. In summary:


-He bought a house in 2002 and the house already had a garden shed, boarded out loft and a velux window in the attic. House is leasehold.
-House sale went through at the time with no problems, no requirements mentioned by any party about the shed, loft or window
-He has now come to sell the house and the new buyer's solicitors are asking for consent from the landlord (who a large company who manage the free hold) for the installation of shed and loft/ window
-My partner applied for retrospective consent to the landlord and also submitted evidence from the local authority that planning permission was not required for the window (as they'd requested evidence of this).
-Months or correspondence, lack of communication from the company, he has now eventually been advised that he has breached the terms of the lease by not requesting consent for the shed, window and loft
-They have requested he sign a new deed variation in order for them to not seek legal action. The company are more than aware that my partner did not make these (or any)changes to the property
-They have also (as part of the new variation) increased ground rent charges more than 400% of current rate and are ordering he pay several hundreds of pounds for retrospective consent.


I understand that there is some legal responsibility as he owns the property but it seems hugely unfair to me that he is being penalised for things he has had no responsibility for, and were never raised as an issue.


As a sideline, he will be going back to the original solicitor he dealt with who sold him the house but due to length of time passed he is not very hopeful of any outcome. Has anyone had this situation before - will he just have to pay up and agree to the new terms (increased ground rent may scare off the potential buyer now too...). Any advice appreciated. Thanks

HouseBuyer77

He is responsible for the changes.

However when he bought I believe asking about alterations made to the property is part of the standard enquiries the solicitor makes of the vendor. If the vendor lied about this (do you know if the previous owner installed the window?) or the solicitor failed to make appropriate enquiries you may be able to claim compensation.

I don't think the freeholder can 'unreasonably withhold consent' for changes and they can only charge for reasonable costs incurred (e.g. surveyor to look at changes and legal costs). A few hundred for retrospective consent seems reasonable. The ground rent change does not. Sadly I can't find any useful online sources to confirm this (http://www.lease-advice.org can be useful, but seems they've altered their website recently and it's a pain to navigate so I can't find anything of use).

Any idea when the alternations were made? I think length of time they've been there is a factor.

Ultimately he could consider restoring the property so it not longer has alternations. Removing a shed is simple enough. Is the loft actually being used as an extra room? Or simply just a nice storage space? If the latter it shouldn't alter the desirability of the property much if the window is removed.

HouseBuyer77

Lease advice do have a video here which discusses alterations: http://www.lease-advice.org/podcast/alterations/ haven't watched it myself but it may contain some useful information.

HouseBuyer77

Oh and he needs to go back through his paperwork from the purchase. It could be that the unauthorised alterations were known about and indemnity insurance obtained. In which case you may be able to claim under that indemnity insurance if for example he ends up restoring the property to it's original state resulting in a loss of value.

CuriousA`

HouseBuyer77 wrote: »

Oh and he needs to go back through his paperwork from the purchase. It could be that the unauthorised alterations were known about and indemnity insurance obtained. In which case you may be able to claim under that indemnity insurance if for example he ends up restoring the property to it's original state resulting in a loss of value.

Hi, thanks for your responses. The window and loft etc was installed prior to him purchasing the house in 2003 (and I believe prior to the person he bought the house from who had been there several years) so it's been a while. I don't think he got indemnity insurance at the time although I would need to confirm but the window and loft was never raised as anything unique at all (so to speak).


He did consider just taking out the window, knocking down the shed etc but the concern is that the freehold company have already identified the breach so we're not sure this would be a solution. It may also affect things with the potential buyer. He does have paperwork from his purchase so will be trying to see if there is potential to claim anything from his solicitor at the time but as I say he's not hopeful. Thanks for your help

CuriousA`

To confirm, the loft is just boarded out and used for storage, it has never been used for a room nor advertised as such or anything.