We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Obtaining consent for extension in share of freehold

145679

Comments

  • bouicca21 wrote: »
    The freeholder will suffer a loss because of acquiring additional maintenance and repair obligations.

    No they won't because we told them they wouldn't. We have agreed on paying any increase in insurance premium. They already refuse to participate in the repair of our structural walls that have large cracks just because they weren't considered "life threatening". I wouldn't ask anything from them unless they were responsible e.g. throwing something out the window that would damage it. But otherwise, like our contractor, engineer, planning officer and lawyer said, the extension is really minor and not at all considered a risk. I don't mind at all clarifying that they do not have any obligation towards our extension in writing.
  • You have a right to make improvements regardless of what the lease says unless the landlord suffers a loss in value. That’s the only relevant info you need. Talk to your solicitor on that basis. Your neighbour might not like it but they don’t have rights to prevent you doing something that otherwise you’d be entitled to do.

    We do have a lot of improvement works to go through, and many would involve cutting, maiming, injuring the walls (e.g. changing the electricals, plumbing, sockets, drainage etc), meaning they'd say we breach the lease but bringing what you just said, they'd be breaching the lease themselves by refusing what's permitted..
    Although, how do we use the extension as an improvement...? We thought we'd do it because the flood risk assessment said we were at high risk of flooding and were advised to extend the patio to the other side where the bedroom with the large cracks in the rear wall are. Hence, considering the amount of work we need to go through, we thought we'd add a little bonus for the hardwork.... that flat above us had originally said after they understood the terrace wasn't possible that she'd help get everyone to approve so we can move on.....which she all of a sudden retracted from (i think the parents were the reason); we had talked to few others when bumping into them and they didn't mind the idea at all, so was really unexpected...
  • Okrib wrote: »
    you need to get the requisite number of neighbours to agree to your plans at an EGM

    What's an EGM?
  • AdrianC
    AdrianC Posts: 42,189 Forumite
    Eighth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Extraordinary General Meeting.

    The AGM - Annual General Meeting - is legally required. An EGM may be required in addition for any major issues which affect all the shareholders substantially. Like this.
  • AnotherJoe wrote: »
    Would you want to live in a block of four flats where the other three neighbours hate you?

    Not at all, but the co-owners have asked me to seek legal advice to overrule what her legal adviser said so we just need to prove we are in a stronger position. The co-owners are in a !!!!!! position and that saddens me; they are stuck between two co-owners with potential threats... it's all about finding which one outweights the other... and considering she wouldnt participate in paying for the common parts and facade repainting, I doubt she'd want to spend those "extremely high legal costs", also because she's threatening the freehold and she's part of it, which our lawyer said would mean she'd be suing herself in the process. Hence, what matters is that the other co-owners safely give us consent; then if she wants to sue us and keep trying to destroy us for no reason, she is free to try. But if I was her, I'd probably want to start being a bit considerate and conciliating and just meet us in person so we can avoid sounding all against one another
  • AnotherJoe wrote: »
    As an aside but I think it's relevant, if you wanted a bigger place, why on earth did you buy a smaller one which had specific and direct covenants against being extended ? This is all on you, don't try to pretend you are the injured party here, without you wishing to change everyone else's covenants there would be no problem.

    They all do. No one's free to do whatever they want, there's always someone on your way. And again, we talked to them in january just after we gave our offer on the flat, so yes, we are the injured cause they changed their mind! And again, this is our first home, we had no idea how complicated this could be as there is a huge number of extensions being done and with crazy appearances, while we only make it matching the style of the building, 2.6m wide, 3m deep; we wanted to extend it so we could add a second bathroom to have a family bathroom. Believe me, I would have given up if I had known such nasty people existed, but we spent so much time, money and effort into that, the sunk costs are too big now. It was supposed to be approved, what happened after couldnt be avoided.... the co-owner who called me to inform me about the crazy neighbour above threatening to sue him told me if it wasnt down to her they would have all approved; they are waiting for me to overrule the legal advice given to them thats all.
  • MarianeJ
    MarianeJ Posts: 35 Forumite
    Okrib wrote: »
    On point 1 - If there are structural issues then that is down to the freehold company to repair. This should be reported and quotes obtained to fix it. This would mean a bill for everyone in the building. You might, perhaps, decide you were happy to remedy this for the sake of your fellow freeholders while doing your extension?

    Yes that's what we told them, that we were happy to take all the costs involved if they were happy with us going ahead with the works..
    Okrib wrote: »
    On point 2 - depending how aggressive you want to be, you could raise a complaint to the freehold company about contraventions to the lease (depending on what the lease says about floor coverings). Be careful though, because there might well be a clause about pets...

    I don't want to be aggressive about it, we genuinely need to know because we can hear them quite a lot so we'd need ceiling insulation if required; however, if she realises she's breaching the lease on that aspects, I assume she'd step back...
  • AnotherJoe
    AnotherJoe Posts: 19,622 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Fifth Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic
    edited 30 October 2018 at 2:55PM
    MarianeJ wrote: »
    I doubt she'd want to spend those "extremely high legal costs", also because she's threatening the freehold and she's part of it, which our lawyer said would mean she'd be suing herself in the process
    Then for goodness sake call her bluff and get on with it.
    MarianeJ wrote: »
    They all do. No one's free to do whatever they want, there's always someone on your way.
    Thats not correct. There are many properties where you wouldnt have such issues and you wouldnt have litigious neighbours who could object with at least some basis in law, unlike yours..
    MarianeJ wrote: »
    And again, this is our first home, we had no idea how complicated this could be as there is a huge number of extensions being done and with crazy appearances, while we only make it matching the style of the building, 2.6m wide, 3m deep;
    Irrelevant
    MarianeJ wrote: »
    we spent so much time, money and effort into that, the sunk costs are too big now. .
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_cost#Loss_aversion_and_the_sunk_cost_fallacy
    MarianeJ wrote: »
    the co-owner who called me to inform me about the crazy neighbour above threatening to sue him told me if it wasnt down to her they would have all approved; they are waiting for me to overrule the legal advice given to them thats all.

    You cannot possibly "overrule legal advice" because you aren't a judge so you'll be waiting a long time. You could probide them an indemnity are you willing to pay that?
    I and others have already posted what you can do, its up to you which you choose and whether you go ahead or not.


    Seems to me you made a high risk purchase of a money pit, what with cracks in walls, risk of flooding, too small, too many conditions stating you cannot do the works you want to, and uncooperative neighbours who will kick up a fuss about any joint works needed or not.

    If i was in your position I'd tart it up superficially, sell it and regard it as a lesson learned rather than throw good money after bad but that's your choice.


    .... hmmm that triggers a final idea. Tell the two neighbours who will potentially side with you that it looks like that, unless they agree you can do your works, you are going to have to sell your flat at a loss, which will look very bad when it comes to them wanting to sell as that will pretty much directly impact the price of their flats when buyers can see the price of flats in their block dropping. Maybe that will give them the gumption to vote in your favour. And if that doesn't work take this advice https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7QhxklIKbw
  • if the women is not the owner ignore her. I email all the directors and they all replied yes bar one (Knew she would say no) so she was out voted so the build could go ahead. ignore this women.
  • AdrianC wrote: »
    Extraordinary General Meeting.

    The AGM - Annual General Meeting - is legally required. An EGM may be required in addition for any major issues which affect all the shareholders substantially. Like this.

    I didnt know AGM meeting was legally required once a year. Not had any for 2 years with ours. No need to be honest as we deal with issues with emails. We are the only owners that live in the building the others are let out.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.4K Life & Family
  • 258.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.