Garden flat - 50% garden freeholders, but only I got access - sell it?

BigGardens

Hi,
I’m looking to buy a garden flat (leasehold) with share of freehold. The freehold is a ltd company and I would have 35% of the shares and the other three flats in the house share the remaining 65% of the shares – so in total four freeholders/directors.

When I checked on the land-registry, I could see 50% of the garden (the back part) is un-demised and owned by the freehold under a separate title (added to the freehold 40 years ago) and not included in my leasehold demise. I'm the only one that have access to the back of the garden and the previous owner had sole use of it for 28 years.

My concerns;

1. Could the other freeholders vote to sell off the un-demised area that belongs to the freehold to a neighbour by majority vote (or use as a bargaining chip if disagreements in the future) and I couldn’t block it – I'm the only one really benefiting from that area? Or would this not be an ordinary resolution and require special resolution and I therefore could block the sale due I got to enough shares so they cant get 75%. (The freehold Ltd Memorandum of Association mention “all business should be deemed as special that is transacted”, but don’t understand if the means that all business need to be special resolution or only covering notice period for the meeting).
2. That it has been sole usage for at least 28 years (probably 40 years), would that make a difference?

I would of course use a solicitor later if my offer would be accepted. But before I spend a lot of money, it would make a difference to get some views on the possibilities I will lose usage of 50% of the garden (the key feature on why I would buy the property). Otherwise much lower value for the property…

I would be very grateful for some guidance / views on this topic, I have searched around and couldn’t find the answer...

Thanks in advance.

BigGardens

Bump - I would hope someone has some views on the above.
Thanks! :j

Rosemary7391

Why would someone else want to buy it? Can it be accessed other than from the flat you're looking at buying?

BigGardens

Hi - the only ones I could see would be prepared to offer lots of money for the garden would be the opposite neighbours or either neighbour on the side of the property and they would amend their fence line accordingly to increase their garden. London gardens has a pretty high price tag.

It can not be accessed by anyone else from the property.

Im also looking at adverse possession rights due to sole use for such a long time… but all dependant on what it says in the leasehold lease.

agrinnall

I think you need to engage a solicitor now rather than later. It might cost you a bit up front but could save you a lot of worrying before comin to a decision.

bouicca21

Read the lease. Mine has a provision specifically stating what the freeholder can and cannot do with the garden.

getmore4less

BigGardens wrote: »

Hi - the only ones I could see would be prepared to offer lots of money for the garden would be the opposite neighbours or either neighbour on the side of the property and they would amend their fence line accordingly to increase their garden. London gardens has a pretty high price tag.

It can not be accessed by anyone else from the property.

Im also looking at adverse possession rights due to sole use for such a long time… but all dependant on what it says in the leasehold lease.

did they not already own it as part of their share of the freehold.

Can you claim adverse possession of something you already own?

BigGardens

Solicitor - Thanks. Yes, that is starting to my conclusion as well. Seems a bit complicated..

Adverse Possession - I would assume with my leasehold hat on I dont own it. But with my shared of freehold hat I own it. So a bit weird.

BigGardens

Bouicca21 - yes. I agree. The lease(s) would probably hold the answer. They are trying to find it (probate)

unforeseen

Adverse possession is out for a few reasons.

It needs to be without the knowledge of the freeholder. As the leaseholder is a director of the freeholder company then the freeholder is aware of it. If you want to argue the point then the counter argument and claim is that the leaseholder as director withheld important information from the company and could be chased personally for any costs/losses associated with the claim.

BigGardens

unforeseen - thanks. Didnt know that and make sense if that is the case. Guess I need to read up a bit more on adverse possession.