Deed of Variation for error in lease

Tom99

initial rent = £100 Initial Rent = £200

AdrianC

Capitalisation is really expensive, clearly.

eddddy

Jigglebiz wrote: »

I see. So do you think there is not in fact an error in the lease at all?

No - there's no error along the lines you describe.

But see posts #19 to #23. The may be an argument about whether the 'Initial Rent' of £200 starts in year 25 or year 30.

Jigglebiz

It appears the Rent = £100, until the Review Date
The Initial Rent = £200

Is the buyers solicitor just not reading this properly? <desperate crossing of fingers>

Tom99

Jigglebiz wrote: »

It appears the Rent = £100, until the Review Date
The Initial Rent = £200
Is the buyers solicitor just not reading this properly? <desperate crossing of fingers>

1.5 should have said:

1.5 'Review Date' means the First Review Date and each fifth anniversary of the First Review Date

Jigglebiz

What should I be saying to my solicitor to break the deadlock?

He has repeated that the issue in the lease is that there is reference to the initial rent being £100 and a seperate reference to it being £200
He also says that as the lease has a clause which provides that the rent may increase over time it is not unusual that the ground rent at present is higher than the amount referred to in the lease

AdrianC

Jigglebiz wrote: »

What should I be saying to my solicitor to break the deadlock?

"Here's the £1,700. Get the DoV underway."

G_M

How much money is in dispute? If the freeholder were o claim the higher figure, how muc might the leaseholder have to stump up?


£100? Plus some interest/back rent?


So either
* offer todrop the asking price by, say, £200, so the buyer is covered for any potential future claim, or
* take out an indemnity insurance (£100- £150?) to pay out if the freeholder claims in future



But to pay £1000+ to vary the Lease? Pointless!


As for the £75 paid every 6 months, again, the leaseholder couldquery this when the next rent demand is received. No big deal.

Jigglebiz

The buyers sol insists on the DOV because the issue will come up again when the property is sold. My sol agrees this is pointless but they have made it clear that is a condition of their proceeding. According to my sol it is definitely a lack of clarity and although freeholder has clarified how it should be read this isn’t enough to satisfy buyers sol.

davidmcn

G_M wrote: »

* take out an indemnity insurance (£100- £150?) to pay out if the freeholder claims in future

Insurance isn't going to be an option now they've flagged up to the freeholder exactly what the problem is.