Deed of variation - needed?

Jonners0910

Hi all

We are STC in the sale of our leasehold flat, however much to our surprise the landlord has shared information with our buyers that two items of work undertaken on the flat did not have his permission. The first breach was for significant restructuring works undertaken in 2004 however he failed to inform us of this lack of permission on the equivalent documentation when we bought (and when we went round to his flat pre-purchase in 2014). The second is fair and relates to our replacing the back door with an more secure, triple lock UPVC door.

Our solicitor reckons these can be retrospectively permitted by the landlord agreeing to sign a simple letter outlining the changes. The landlord is insisting on a deed of a variation which I anticipate will cost more money in legal fees etc.

Does anyone know if the letter approach is feasible?

We are frustrated as we felt our relationship with the landlord was friendly given he lived upstairs, and is a really genial guy to deal with, For some reason he is digging in his heels over one issue that he's clearly chosen to only recently remember, and the other which we feel is a reasonable improvement to overall security.

All advice gratefully received!

gembert83

First of all check your lease. It is usual that there is a covenant stating there can be no alterations/additions without the consent of the landlord. If this is the case then a written letter of consent would suffice. I would write to him asking for his retrospective consent - there is the possibility he could try and charge for this, as unfortunately some landlords do see this as a money making exercise. If there is no covenant preventing alterations there is nothing to worry about. If however there is a complete covenant preventing alterations/additions and not making any reference to consent then you would need to amend the lease by way of a deed of variation. This would involve drafting one (they are quite simple) and sending to him/his solicitor for approval. The landlord would most likely expect you to meet his fees for doing this which would be reasonable as it is only being done for your benefit. You could see whether your buyer would register the deed on registration of the transfer to them to save you a land registry fee.

Land_Registry

Jonnors0910 - what is the landlord expecting to be varied here?

If you have breached a covenant then I would assume the covenant has not changed so what needs to be varied?

If the structural/door change means that the terms of the lease have been varied as the current version refers to specifics that are no more/changed then a D of V reads as if it is the right option as whilst he can provide retrospective consent it may pose a problem later if people make more changes and the historical link(s) are not obvious

Something your solicitor will hopefully be able to unravel with the landlord

Jonners0910

Land_Registry_representative wrote: »

Jonnors0190 - what is the landlord expecting to be varied here?

If you have breached a covenant then I would assume the covenant has not changed so what needs to be varied?

If the structural/door change means that the terms of the lease have been varied as the current version refers to specifics that are no more/changed then a D of V reads as if it is the right option as whilst he can provide retrospective consent it may pose a problem later if people make more changes and the historical link(s) are not obvious

Something your solicitor will hopefully be able to unravel with the landlord

Thank you for your note it seems like the landlord actually wants a restrospctive licence to alter. Does this change anything?

Land_Registry

Jonners0910 - not something we would deal with or be aware of I'm afraid so it's wider advice you need here. It's not something I've come across from a registration perspective so you will need more details to understand whether it equates to a variation which in turn needs registering or not

eddddy

Jonners0910 wrote: »

The landlord is insisting on a deed of a variation which I anticipate will cost more money in legal fees etc.

Does anyone know if the letter approach is feasible?

We are frustrated as we felt our relationship with the landlord was friendly given he lived upstairs, and is a really genial guy to deal with,

Are you sure that the LL/Freeholder is insisting on this? It's very likely to be the buyer (or their solicitor) who's insisting.

If the lease is now wrong (e.g. the plan is incorrect), it's reasonable for the buyer to want it corrected (varied).


Based on this thread and your other one...
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5623428

... you seem to concerned about "retrospective licence to alter" vs "letter of consent".

They are probably exactly the same thing. The same piece of paper could be called a "retrospective licence to alter" or a "letter of consent".

(Unless somebody is suggesting otherwise.)

But again, the buyer's solicitor may be happy with a one paragraph letter/licence, or they may want a much more detailed letter/licence, with witnessed signatures etc.

Jonners0910

Hello

The buyer's solicitors has asked for us to show permission was granted, and while our solicitor has recommended that only a letter could suffice, the LL is asking for the more official version of a license to alter. I have mentioned that on one count he neglected to tell us about a breach in 2014 when we bought the flat so to bring up now is unfair and inconsistent. His response being that it was our solicitors fault. He didn't even own the lease in 04 so I'm pretty miffed on mny counts. Now looking for a license to alter template as my solicitor has no access to one! Grrrrrrr...