Flat Number incorrect on Lease

SaraD

Hi there,
When I tried to sell my flat in 2018 I encountered a problem with the flat number. The flat was No. 4, but the header sheet on the Lease document stated No. 5 (the rest of the lease clearly referred to 'my' flat, including the plot drawing/plan. 

I checked with all other flat owners within the block of 11 and 9 of them had the same issue on their Lease docs. We were able to cross-refer with the developer's plans and realised the header sheets on the Leases showed the original PLOT number, which in those 9 cases was different to the final flat number.

My buyer's mortgage company wasn't happy with that (even though the flats have been bought and sold without any problem for over 20 years) and the only way I was able to proceed with the sale was to forfeit £1350 from the sale price, to go towards a Deed of Variation to change the number on the Lease. I reluctantly agreed but asked my solicitor to put a clause in the contract to ensure the money was used solely for the purpose of completing the Deed of Variation, with the buyer paying her own solicitors fees for the process.

I agreed to it because I needed to sell. However, I couldn't see how it would be possible to do it because there would be a knock-on effect on the other 9 properties with the same issue, i.e. if my lease header sheet was amended to Flat 4, then the one with Flat 4 on the header sheet would also need to be amended, since there couldn't be 2 flats with the same number. And so on....for the 9 flats with the same issue. Who would pay for it, anyway??

Since then, I have regularly asked for an update on the situation. After 2 years, I finally heard from the buyer's solicitor via my own solicitor, as follows: 
“We confirm that we contacted the Management Company regarding the Deed of Variation and paid their enquiry fee.  The Management Company then responded to say that they would enter into a Deed of Variation but they required additional fees.  Having paid the upfront initial enquiry fee there were insufficient funds to undertake to pay the costs of the Deed of Variation.  We then requested additional funds from our client so that we could progress this matter but to date those additional funds have not been forthcoming and therefore we are unable to undertake to pay the Management Company’s additional costs in this matter to progress it further.”

I have heard via a former neighbour that the lady who bought the flat is planning to sell next year anyway. 
Assuming that is true, she is unlikely to pay any further fees (even though there shouldn't BE any further fees from the Management Company because the funds I forfeited were based on their own quote). 

So, can anyone advise me on where I stand with this? I'm imagining a scenario where she moves and her solicitor keeps the remaining money. Or even if she doesn't move, that the entire process stagnates indefinitely. 

I hope I have explained things clearly - any ideas would be gratefully received.

Thanks
Sara

mrschaucer

Doesn't it all depend on the exact wording of the clause that your solicitor put into the sale contract?  If you'd like to share that then people might be able to comment.

frogglet

When we bought a new house 30 years ago, it was referred by  both the plot number and house number in various documents. Its registered as its house number at land registry.

SaraD

mrschaucer said:

Doesn't it all depend on the exact wording of the clause that your solicitor put into the sale contract?  If you'd like to share that then people might be able to comment.

Thanks, that's a good point and, embarrassingly, I haven't thought to check on that - I will, now though.

mrschaucer

On the face of it, if the clause says the money is only to be used to arrange the Deed of Variation and this has not been done, then you should be due the remainder of the £1350 held as retention, less the manco's "enquiry fee", which surely couldn't have been anywhere near that amount.  If the buyer had wanted to proceed with the Deed she would have told her solictor to contact you (via your solicitor) to explain that the retention was not enough, and to give you the opportunity to pay more.  She does not appear to be that bothered about the matter, and two years seems ample time to give her to progress this.
Once you have checked the wording of the clause, get your solicitor to formally request return of the remaining amount of the retention money.  I do hope he put some sort of time limit in there.

greatcrested

I assume the Land Registry leasehold Title and Plan both correctly identify the flat, using the correct number (4)?

It's just the lease itself that is the problem?

SaraD

mrschaucer said:

On the face of it, if the clause says the money is only to be used to arrange the Deed of Variation and this has not been done, then you should be due the remainder of the £1350 held as retention, less the manco's "enquiry fee", which surely couldn't have been anywhere near that amount.  If the buyer had wanted to proceed with the Deed she would have told her solictor to contact you (via your solicitor) to explain that the retention was not enough, and to give you the opportunity to pay more.  She does not appear to be that bothered about the matter, and two years seems ample time to give her to progress this.
Once you have checked the wording of the clause, get your solicitor to formally request return of the remaining amount of the retention money.  I do hope he put some sort of time limit in there.

Thanks - I have a horrible feeling that I may not have seen the written clause anywhere. I have the email confirming my conversation with my solicitor and asking her to do it, but can't find anything subsequently. Possibly there was so much going on I forgot to check on it. But I still think there's a case for me to pursue, so thanks for your comments.

greatcrested

SaraD said:

mrschaucer said:

On the face of it, if the clause says the money is only to be used to arrange the Deed of Variation and this has not been done, then you should be due the remainder of the £1350 held as retention, less the manco's "enquiry fee", which surely couldn't have been anywhere near that amount.  If the buyer had wanted to proceed with the Deed she would have told her solictor to contact you (via your solicitor) to explain that the retention was not enough, and to give you the opportunity to pay more.  She does not appear to be that bothered about the matter, and two years seems ample time to give her to progress this.
Once you have checked the wording of the clause, get your solicitor to formally request return of the remaining amount of the retention money.  I do hope he put some sort of time limit in there.

Thanks - I have a horrible feeling that I may not have seen the written clause anywhere. I have the email confirming my conversation with my solicitor and asking her to do it, but can't find anything subsequently. Possibly there was so much going on I forgot to check on it. But I still think there's a case for me to pursue, so thanks for your comments.

If you instructed the solicitor to insert a conditonal clause in the contract, and she failed to do so, you'd have a claim against the solicitor.......

NameUnavailable

The new owner may have difficulty selling for the same reason and decide to stump up the extra to complete the deed of variation then. Not sure you can demand the money back but as said it all depends on what your solicitors clause states.

davidmcn

NameUnavailable said:

The new owner may have difficulty selling for the same reason

I doubt it really - confusion between plot numbers and postal addresses is pretty commonplace, what's more important is whether the plan and any objective description of the property is correct (e.g. "the westmost flat on the second floor"). Might be nice to have the correct postal address too, but hardly worth throwing thousands of pounds at it. I realise the OP appears to be beyond the point of arguing this though!

ChloeManoey

I know it's a bit late now ... but ... would an indemnity policy for a defective lease not cover this? I had to get one as the lease referred to my flat as "the one outlined in red" but there was only a black and white copy. The policy was £99. 

Just wondered if it might be useful, as the current owner will likely have trouble selling, might get you your original money back rather than them spending it!