Missing Lease Plans and Dissolved Management Company

cheesycake7

Hello everyone, I'm in the process of purchasing a flat which has dragged on way longer than expected. I'm on the brink of walking away from the purchase multiple times but really love the flat and think I've got it at a good price.

My solicitors uncovered issues with 3 of the plans referred to in the lease:

1. Plan 1 - This is the plan that identifies the whole block of flats. Only a B/W copy is available (so the block is not edged in red).
2. Plan 2 - This should be the plan that identifies the flat I intend to purchase - this plan is missing.
3. Plan 3 - This should be the plan that identifies the parking space - this plan is also missing.

I've read multiple other threads in this forum and have also exhausted possibilities of finding the lost plans. We have tried the previous lawyers (who no longer keeps the documents since it's been >7 years), and have also tried the management company/freeholder (which are both dissolved in 2013 and 2009 respectively), all to no avail. I have obtained lease copies from my neighbours which shows the complete plans but these are of no help.

I've then requested for a Deed of Variation to be performed to insert the missing plans into the lease, and the seller has also agreed to do this/cover the costs. After attempting this, the seller's solicitors have came back saying they are not able to progress this due to the landlord company being dissolved and an RTM company being set up to take up all management functions, but this RTM company are not in a position to grant a Deed of Variation.

They have also added that they do not believe a Deed of Variation is necessary since the description of the property and building within the lease is sufficient to correctly identify the property and that is it also not a correction that I require, but rather a lost aspect of the lease.

They have suggested:

1. An indemnity policy (which I have previously pushed back on before uncovering all this).
2. Applying for a vesting order vesting the disclaimed property(headlease) to a tenant. (I'm not too sure what they mean by this by I assume that makes me the landlord, which doesn't really help?)
3. Applying to the tribunal for a Deed of Variation (This contradicts what they say about a Deed of Variation not required, but is the process of this straightforward?)

My lawyer's are not experienced enough on the vesting order to advise me and have suggested that I seek some advice and revert to them once I've decided.

This whole process has taken 4-5 months now and I'm getting really frustrated. Given the seller has also been trying to rectify the issue, I do hope that this is something we would be able to resolve.

ethank

Why won't you take an indemnity policy?

davidmcn

cheesycake7 wrote: »

My lawyer's are not experienced enough on the vesting order to advise me

Aren't they offering any advice at all about how to progress this? If not, what are you paying them for?

cheesycake7

Won't take an indemnity policy because am worried it affects future marketability/worried it creates problems when I try to sell in the future.

My lawyers have been helpful up to this point. They did say they don't think the vesting order solves the problem, but have also suggested I seek some advise elsewhere. They provided me with the contact of another local conveyancor and I suspect they will need any further legal advice I obtain in writing (so I might have to pay this other lawyer).

Really tempted to just accept the indemnity policy and go ahead with purchase but am afraid I'm not making a rational decision here. I didn't want to take the short way out (indemnity) at the start but most of the options I've pursued ended up being dead ends.

From a buyer's perspective, would missing the plans above deter you from purchasing a property?

davidmcn

cheesycake7 wrote: »

From a buyer's perspective, would missing the plans above deter you from purchasing a property?

Why would it, if the risk is covered by a suitable indemnity policy? The reason the insurers are willing to provide cover is because the risk is tiny in the first place.

cheesycake7

My lawyers have been saying there might be future issues when I come to sell the property (unsure if this is just a generic statement that they make for defect leases) and that's why I've been reluctant to accept it.

Any thoughts on the vesting order/applying to tribunal for the Deed of Variation?

davidmcn

cheesycake7 wrote: »

Any thoughts on the vesting order/applying to tribunal for the Deed of Variation?

Not in any detail, no. But anything which involves contacting the freeholder about it would probably then prevent you from falling back on an indemnity policy (as the insurers wouldn't want you "tipping off" anybody about there being a problem).

Would your lender be satisfied with an indemnity policy? (or rather, would your solicitor be happy to sign it off to your lender as suitable?) Is there actually any genuine ambiguity about what's being let by the lease? How old is the lease?

cheesycake7

Based on communications with my solicitors I think they are willing to sign it off as suitable to the mortgagor (their advice has been more ‘proceed with caution’ rather than ‘do not proceed’). I’m also guessing if they’re not willing to sign off on it, then it wouldn’t be presented to me as an option in the first place,

The lease is 999 years long with 98x remaining. We also have the headlease. I feel there is little ambiguity to what is being let by the lease - under the definition for ‘Premises’ it mentions the flat number, as well as the floor. While there is a missing plan for the parking space, the lease also mentions the parking space number, and under the definition of ‘premises’ the parking space is also mentioned.

cheesycake7

Anyone else able to provide another opinion? Still haven’t reverted to my lawyers as really scratching my head on this one.

diggingdude

You really should be speaking to your legal experts rather than people on the internet to guide you on this. I think you should walk away, but then I'm not legally trained or attached to the building

cheesycake7

Thanks. I’ve spoken to another lawyer who will be in touch with mine. I think at the end of the day, the lawyers (or forum members here) won’t be able to give me a definitive answer. It will be up to my risk appetite...

I’ve been getting mixed answers from everyone I’ve asked.