Anybody to blame or just one of those things?

Jaglad111

Thanks everybody. The lease is 977 years at £60 p.a so I have no issue with that at all. Plan there is to wait 2 years and then buy it.

As an update, the vendor is having building control around today for an inspection. I'm not looking for it to be up to current regs but will be happy if the work was completed to a reasonable standard. Any remedial works can be done by us if not excessively severe.

We are still waiting on the freeholders permissions and I am prepared to pay a reasonable sum to get these if requested.

Coconut01

So the freeholder is being difficult and it may cost you to gain permission, what makes you think you'll be able to buy the freehold at a reasonable price in a couple of years?

Also is the lease likely to increase over the next 5-10 years?

davidmcn

davemorton wrote: »

Again, why is everyone against a leasehold?

Because even in the case of not particularly onerous leases, you may still be required to cross the freeholder's palm with silver every time you sell or make alterations which (objectively speaking) don't affect their interest in the property. Luckily we don't have any of this nonsense in Scotland.

chappers

Jaglad111 wrote: »

As an update, the vendor is having building control around today for an inspection. I'm not looking for it to be up to current regs but will be happy if the work was completed to a reasonable standard. Any remedial works can be done by us if not excessively severe.

.

The inspector won't be interested in that, just whether it passes regs or not.

My concerns centre around 4 areas. The first being the correct insulation having been installed. The second regarding the floor and how it was raised. Thirdly the footings where the door was originally are to the correct depth (I believe 1 meter?) And finally the correct installation of the gas/electrics.

Nor will he be able to assess these concerns just from a visual inspection, is the vendor willing to start ripping the fabric of the building apart. Gas and electrics could be addressed to some degree with Gas safety test and periodic electrical inspection and testing.
With regards to sign off you might get lucky and he might just say sod it, the works are so historic and say it's OK, though I am surprised they even agreed to inspect after so long as the works are well outside the period for enforcement


All the above can be overcome through an independent inspection should the vendor be prepared to cover the cost.

The final issue is the landlord/freeholder deciding they will grant permission.

This is your more serious issue and one which will probably take some time to resolve.
If having the room is the most important thing and this can't be sorted than walk away.
If the actual room isn't ultimately essential and it's the cost of enforcement that bothers you then consider indemnity, but seeing as the freeholder is now aware that might not even be an option

If you go down the route of seeking permission, what will you do if they refuse as the likelihood is that they will then seek to enforce that decision.
One thing in your favour though is the length of the lease, by granting a 999 year lease it is clear that the freeholder has very little material interest in the property.

The freeholder issue is a complete minefield and that is why your solicitor has advised you to walk. It's not something like BC or planning enforcement that has time limits for enforcement
It might not be an issue, and they just rubber stamp it, but are you willing to take that chance. If it all goes tits up the £3k you have spent out so far could end up looking like chicken feed.
Be glad your solicitor has done his job properly.
Both the vendors and the agents quite clearly knew this was an issue.

elliemet23

We've just bought a house that didn't have building regs for a re-layout of the downstairs... The solicitors asked us to pay £29.50 for some kind of indemnity and it was all sorted... Not sure why they're making out its a massive issue!

Good luck!
xxx

Jaglad111

Building control have signed off on the works so very pleased about that!

Now time for the freeholder. The majority of houses on the site have already bought out their leases so I'm wondering if I can kill two birds with one stone. I am going to see if they would be prepared to sell me the freehold.

I believe the other freeholds on the estate were bought for 2-3k so although it would dent our renovations budget it wouldn't excessively hurt us.

chappers

elliemet23 wrote: »

We've just bought a house that didn't have building regs for a re-layout of the downstairs... The solicitors asked us to pay £29.50 for some kind of indemnity and it was all sorted... Not sure why they're making out its a massive issue!

Good luck!
xxx

Because if you have read the whole thread there is more than a BC issue at play here.
A freeholder failing to give permission and then enforcing that could be a big issue.

chappers

Jaglad111 wrote: »

Building control have signed off on the works so very pleased about that!

Now time for the freeholder. The majority of houses on the site have already bought out their leases so I'm wondering if I can kill two birds with one stone. I am going to see if they would be prepared to sell me the freehold.

I believe the other freeholds on the estate were bought for 2-3k so although it would dent our renovations budget it wouldn't excessively hurt us.

Good news on the BC front.

I reckon buying the lease would be your best bet, particularly if you want to sell again.
Equally it appears that the freeholders don't have much interest in the freehold so unlikely to take any enforcement.
Sometime developers like to keep control of what new homeowners do for a while, for example if building a whole estate of houses, so they can control development whilst still building/selling the rest of the houses,

AdrianC

An indemnity policy just covers the cost of defending any enforcement action that may arise. Building control can't do anything after 15 years, so it's worthless there. Freeholder? Well, it's possible, but vanishingly unlikely.

The question is whether it was converted properly. Built-in garage on a house that was less than a decade old at the time? It's really only going to be a question of insulation standards, and maybe fire breaks. A BC visit now can't look at anything behind the plaster and cosmetics, so fairly pointless - and if it's the local authority's BC guy, then there goes the indemnity anyway.

If you like the house, I really wouldn't let this make ANY difference at all. As for the solicitor saying "It'll be unsellable" - well, it's already been sold once without the paperwork, and may well now sell again... So that kinda proves him wrong on that... The longer goes by, the less relevant the paperwork is.

Surrey_EA

chappers wrote: »

Good news on the BC front.

I reckon buying the [STRIKE]lease[/STRIKE]freehold would be your best bet, particularly if you want to sell again.
Equally it appears that the freeholders don't have much interest in the freehold so unlikely to take any enforcement.
Sometime developers like to keep control of what new homeowners do for a while, for example if building a whole estate of houses, so they can control development whilst still building/selling the rest of the houses,

..........................