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.
📨 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!
Covenant breach accusation
garethlewis
Posts: 15 Forumite
Hello,
I'll try and be brief but also give as many details as poss.
Until very recently we had the leasehold on a first floor flat. When we purchased the lease, there was a wooden 'roof terrace' type structure already sitting on the flat roof of the downstairs shop extension (apparently put there by the person who had the lease before us, or even the person before that, who knows?). The flat roof roof terrace is just outside our bedroom windows, with no access (other than to reach your arms out of a large hinged window that is). The flat roof is outside the boundaries of the deeds on our lease (that red line thingy on the title deed).
We did not put the wooden structure there, it was put there unknown to the freeholders by 'a seemingly mystery person' who we are assuming was a previous occupier without permission, we have never used it, it isn't withing the boundaries of the leased property, but... it became the subject of some dispute when we were trying to sell. The freeholders seemed to have no idea of its existence until it was raised during the process of the sale, and it was confirmed that it wasn't part of the leasehold flat. At that point we were advised that we had two choices. Remember I said we weren't responsible for putting the structure there.
1. Remove the roof terrace, 2. Have it all inspected, find a way of the structure being rebuilt to give access to the flat roof for if repairs were ever needed, and a price agreed on to have the space added to the deeds.
In the end the buyers said they still wanted to buy the leasehold flat without the roof terrace. So we removed it on the advice of the freeholder to speed up the sale of the flat.
We are now being charged with the cost of repairs to the flat roof that the roof terrace was on to the tune of £2500 (roof repair, and written inspection report)
I'm struggling with accepting responsibility for a structure built outside the boundaries of our leasehold.
We have this morning had email instructing us of all the breaches of covenant as a result of the existence of this roof terrace...
Not cause damage to neighbouring property. (we didnt)
Not cause nuisance to other property (we havent)
Not place any object outside the premises. (cough)
So, apart from the fact that once the structure was removed, during the process of moving all our possessions out of the flat we briefly kept some pots on the windowsill directly above the flat roof, and placed a plant in a pot on the actual roof (two days or so) and lo and behold an inspection was made and photos taken. Tch.
But we put, and leave our bins outside on the freeholders land 24 hours a day.... seemingly no problem there...
Have WE really ourselves breached any covenants? (remembering the flat roof is outside our boundary)?
The freeholder had no idea or seemingly had no problem with and did not raise the presence of the roof terrace for at least the nearly four years we were at the property but are now saying that even though it was erected prior to our time there it was realised by them during our time there so for that reason we are liable (while it is outside our boundary and hypothetically could have been put there by anyone, even the people downstairs)
Why is this falling to me to pay for? (thanks for reading)
I'll try and be brief but also give as many details as poss.
Until very recently we had the leasehold on a first floor flat. When we purchased the lease, there was a wooden 'roof terrace' type structure already sitting on the flat roof of the downstairs shop extension (apparently put there by the person who had the lease before us, or even the person before that, who knows?). The flat roof roof terrace is just outside our bedroom windows, with no access (other than to reach your arms out of a large hinged window that is). The flat roof is outside the boundaries of the deeds on our lease (that red line thingy on the title deed).
We did not put the wooden structure there, it was put there unknown to the freeholders by 'a seemingly mystery person' who we are assuming was a previous occupier without permission, we have never used it, it isn't withing the boundaries of the leased property, but... it became the subject of some dispute when we were trying to sell. The freeholders seemed to have no idea of its existence until it was raised during the process of the sale, and it was confirmed that it wasn't part of the leasehold flat. At that point we were advised that we had two choices. Remember I said we weren't responsible for putting the structure there.
1. Remove the roof terrace, 2. Have it all inspected, find a way of the structure being rebuilt to give access to the flat roof for if repairs were ever needed, and a price agreed on to have the space added to the deeds.
In the end the buyers said they still wanted to buy the leasehold flat without the roof terrace. So we removed it on the advice of the freeholder to speed up the sale of the flat.
We are now being charged with the cost of repairs to the flat roof that the roof terrace was on to the tune of £2500 (roof repair, and written inspection report)
I'm struggling with accepting responsibility for a structure built outside the boundaries of our leasehold.
We have this morning had email instructing us of all the breaches of covenant as a result of the existence of this roof terrace...
Not cause damage to neighbouring property. (we didnt)
Not cause nuisance to other property (we havent)
Not place any object outside the premises. (cough)
So, apart from the fact that once the structure was removed, during the process of moving all our possessions out of the flat we briefly kept some pots on the windowsill directly above the flat roof, and placed a plant in a pot on the actual roof (two days or so) and lo and behold an inspection was made and photos taken. Tch.
But we put, and leave our bins outside on the freeholders land 24 hours a day.... seemingly no problem there...
Have WE really ourselves breached any covenants? (remembering the flat roof is outside our boundary)?
The freeholder had no idea or seemingly had no problem with and did not raise the presence of the roof terrace for at least the nearly four years we were at the property but are now saying that even though it was erected prior to our time there it was realised by them during our time there so for that reason we are liable (while it is outside our boundary and hypothetically could have been put there by anyone, even the people downstairs)
Why is this falling to me to pay for? (thanks for reading)
0
Comments
-
Wow, I’m so sorry this is happening to you, I don’t know this for a fact, but surely if the breach isn’t there anymore you can’t be fined for it if no damage was caused? I don’t see how they have a leg to stand on really!
I would probably talk to a solicitor though, one that specialises in this sort of thing, they will have far greater knowledge on the subject and will be able to fully understand the situation
Hope it works out x0 -
Because you took on responsibility for the flat at the time you bought it. I get your point that a previous owner of your flat was the one that squatted on the roof - but you, presumably, knew/should have known about this roof terrace at the time you bought the flat.
Many of us find we bought a property in a certain condition (as far as we knew) and then find ourselves responsible for having to pay out money to deal with some bodge or other that a previous owner of that property did (even if they'd carefully hidden it from us and we didn't know about it).
I can't see it would be any different because this was done outside your property boundaries - as it was still done by "your" flat.0 -
In the end the buyers said they still wanted to buy the leasehold flat without the roof terrace ...
Can you elaborate on this? Was the roof terrace in your estate agents particulars? What precisely was agreed with your conveyancer and the freeholder in order for the sale to complete? Who owns the neighbouring property with the flat roof?
In general a new long leaseholder inherits the rights and responsibilities and liabilities of their predecessor. This can include service charge debts, and damage to the structure of the building or communal areas.
The Leasehold Advisory Service are worth contacting: have all the paperwork to hand because they will probably want the exact wording.Declutterbug-in-progress.⭐️⭐️⭐️ ⭐️⭐️0 -
You took responsibility for the flat but for all you know, the structure could have been put up by the freeholder when you purchased your flatm and as it isn't your responsibility according to the lease, i can't see that you can be made responsible because there's no proof who did actually put it up. If it's that large, i can't see how the freeholder could have not noticed.
If there's no mention of this in any of your previous purchase documents, then I would just ignore the freeholder, because he has to prove that it was you that did this...and good luck with that.Non me fac calcitrare tuum culi0 -
Oh hang on, you said YOU removed it? If that is the case, then you really should be footing the bill to repair, since you're the one who actually damaged the roof.
If you'd left it alone and feigned ignorance.....Non me fac calcitrare tuum culi0 -
I think you need to discuss the situation with the conveyancer who helped you buy the place. Why did the present buyers solicitor spot this problem and your solicitor didn't?
I suspect you not only need to find out if your conveyancer should have spotted this problem but also find out legally what your responsibilities are.0 -
I think this is also one for proper legal advice. I think you've made matters worse by removing the structure as that could be seen as you accepting liability. Prior to that you could have argued it was nothing to do with you- perhaps the flat below put it there (if you have no access).0
-
Thank you all for replies.
I realise ignorance of the law is no defence... but... we didn't really sit up and realise or take any notice of the fact that this structure was possibly outside our responsibility until the whole charging bit arose. Bit lazy, but I'm desperately truing to avoid a £2500 bill....
A couple of things...
Due care by the land owners' management company to inspect/notice and then question the presence of the structure in the many years it was there and/or when we were there (nearly 4 years), mweans they cant simply lay it at our door
The fact that the 'blame' is being laid at my door as an assumption that the structure was definitely put there by the chap who had the lease before us, or the person before him, whereas, as the management company are saying they have no record of it ever being given permission for, could have been put there by anyone, even hypothetically the landowners' management company!
The management company representative made no indication there would be any charges for inspection or repair when the options were being given (to remove or possibly replace) as a way of moving forward.
That's why we removed it. Just to be able to 'clear the slate' as it were. We never would have done so so readily if we imagined this charge would have been coming...
Do I have any grounds here?0 -
You have not answered my earlier questions (post 4).Declutterbug-in-progress.⭐️⭐️⭐️ ⭐️⭐️0
-
Yes, sorry, here you go...
Was the roof terrace in your estate agents particulars?
The roof terrace was definitely not in the particulars for our sale to the new buyers.
What precisely was agreed with your conveyancer and the freeholder in order for the sale to complete?
There did not seem to be any disagreement between our conveyancer and freeholder, the sale just completed. When I asked the conveyancer they informed us the freeholder would not be able hold up the process. This whole 'charges' information happened after exchange of contracts. Not sure if that changes anything...
Who owns the neighbouring property with the flat roof?
The flat roof is part of the single storey extension used by the ground floor business which is directly underneath the flat. The single storey extension protrudes out from the business premises downstairs.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards