A lease regulation

greatcrested

wherestheremote said:

greatcrested said:

Well add that to the list of questions to ask the neghbours when you speak to them.

You are going to find out more about them before commiting to a multi-hundred-thousand pound purchase yes?

. Is it common for buyers to speak to the neighbours before agreeing to the purchase?

Surprisingly uncommon.

But I would not dream of buying without getting a feel for the neighbours and the neighbourhood.

eddddy

wherestheremote said:

eddddy said:

wherestheremote said:

This is a regulation in a brand new lease which has been extended. I assume if the vendors were breaching the lease, it would have been addressed or mentioned to us?

Who do you think would have addressed it or mentioned it to you?

Anyway, I expect that the vendors would argue that they are not breaching the lease.

So if you buy the property and somebody complains, you'll have to argue that you're not breaching the lease - and see if you win or lose the argument.

I would have to argue in court? Who would determine the outcome?

Does the lease say how disputes between leaseholders and/or disputes between leaseholder and freeholder are settled?

Sometimes leases say that disputes will be decided by a RICS surveyor. So the surveyor would investigate and give their decision.

Otherwise, if the dispute cannot be settled amicably, it could ultimately end up with the freeholder applying for a court order to forfeit the lease (i.e. the freeholder repossess your flat) because you've breached the lease. You would then challenge the court order saying you haven't breached the lease (you'd probably use expert witnesses to support your argument).

And the court would decide whether you've breached your lease, based on the evidence provided by both parties.

davidmcn

Surely you just add in confirmation that the current flooring is deemed to comply with that requirement?

wherestheremote

eddddy said:

wherestheremote said:

eddddy said:

wherestheremote said:

This is a regulation in a brand new lease which has been extended. I assume if the vendors were breaching the lease, it would have been addressed or mentioned to us?

Who do you think would have addressed it or mentioned it to you?

Anyway, I expect that the vendors would argue that they are not breaching the lease.

So if you buy the property and somebody complains, you'll have to argue that you're not breaching the lease - and see if you win or lose the argument.

I would have to argue in court? Who would determine the outcome?

Does the lease say how disputes between leaseholders and/or disputes between leaseholder and freeholder are settled?

Sometimes leases say that disputes will be decided by a RICS surveyor. So the surveyor would investigate and give their decision.

Otherwise, if the dispute cannot be settled amicably, it could ultimately end up with the freeholder applying for a court order to forfeit the lease (i.e. the freeholder repossess your flat) because you've breached the lease. You would then challenge the court order saying you haven't breached the lease (you'd probably use expert witnesses to support your argument).

And the court would decide whether you've breached your lease, based on the evidence provided by both parties.

Oh yes it does actually. That was a new addition too. 

I think I’ll just clarify if the wooden flooring is sufficient before proceeding. 

wherestheremote

wherestheremote said:

eddddy said:

wherestheremote said:

eddddy said:

wherestheremote said:

This is a regulation in a brand new lease which has been extended. I assume if the vendors were breaching the lease, it would have been addressed or mentioned to us?

Who do you think would have addressed it or mentioned it to you?

Anyway, I expect that the vendors would argue that they are not breaching the lease.

So if you buy the property and somebody complains, you'll have to argue that you're not breaching the lease - and see if you win or lose the argument.

I would have to argue in court? Who would determine the outcome?

Does the lease say how disputes between leaseholders and/or disputes between leaseholder and freeholder are settled?

Sometimes leases say that disputes will be decided by a RICS surveyor. So the surveyor would investigate and give their decision.

Otherwise, if the dispute cannot be settled amicably, it could ultimately end up with the freeholder applying for a court order to forfeit the lease (i.e. the freeholder repossess your flat) because you've breached the lease. You would then challenge the court order saying you haven't breached the lease (you'd probably use expert witnesses to support your argument).

And the court would decide whether you've breached your lease, based on the evidence provided by both parties.

Oh yes it does actually. That was a new addition too. 

I think I’ll just clarify if the wooden flooring is sufficient before proceeding. 

If they say yes, is that legally binding?

wherestheremote

davidmcn said:

Surely you just add in confirmation that the current flooring is deemed to comply with that requirement?

Yes I was thinking of that. But would it be added into the lease or just by an email confirmation through solicitors? 

davidmcn

wherestheremote said:

davidmcn said:

Surely you just add in confirmation that the current flooring is deemed to comply with that requirement?

Yes I was thinking of that. But would it be added into the lease or just by an email confirmation through solicitors? 

Preferably in the lease. 

eddddy

wherestheremote said:

I think I’ll just clarify if the wooden flooring is sufficient before proceeding. 

That approach probably won't work.   A sensible freeholder would not comment whether the floor conforms to the lease - they would simply say "read the lease".

Otherwise, the freeholder could say "yes - the wooden floor is ok", but then another leaseholder takes legal action and the court says "no - the wooden floor is not ok". You would then want to take action against the freeholder for misleading you. To avoid this, a sensible freeholder would refuse to comment.

wherestheremote

eddddy said:

wherestheremote said:

I think I’ll just clarify if the wooden flooring is sufficient before proceeding. 

That approach probably won't work.   A sensible freeholder would not comment whether the floor conforms to the lease - they would simply say "read the lease".

Otherwise, the freeholder could say "yes - the wooden floor is ok", but then another leaseholder takes legal action and the court says "no - the wooden floor is not ok". You would then want to take action against the freeholder for misleading you. To avoid this, a sensible freeholder would refuse to comment.

I thought it might be a good approach as it is a share of freehold property, so perhaps the occupants downstairs will say it’s okay/not okay. Especially as they are the ones who have amended the lease in the first place . 

davidmcn

eddddy said:

wherestheremote said:

I think I’ll just clarify if the wooden flooring is sufficient before proceeding. 

That approach probably won't work.   A sensible freeholder would not comment whether the floor conforms to the lease - they would simply say "read the lease".

Otherwise, the freeholder could say "yes - the wooden floor is ok", but then another leaseholder takes legal action and the court says "no - the wooden floor is not ok". You would then want to take action against the freeholder for misleading you. To avoid this, a sensible freeholder would refuse to comment.

If it were an existing lease, yes. But they're negotiating a new one, so why can't the current freeholder confirm whether or not they're satisfied with the current floor?