Flat query (narrow staircase to loft)

snowqueen555

Hwwwwwwwwe

eddddy

1. The installation of the staircase should have been signed-off by building control. If it wasn't, and it was installed within the last 12 months, that may be a problem. If it was done more than 12 months ago, you might just need indemnity insurance.

2. Is the roof space demised with the flat? i.e. Will it actually belong to you - or does it belong to the freeholder? If it belongs to the freeholder, and the freeholder finds out you're using it, they might tell you to stop using it.

3. Did the leaseholder get consent from the freeholder to install that staircase (if it was installed after the lease was first granted). It might be a problem if it was installed without consent.


Edit to add...

But you might also want a surveyor to give you their opinion on things like:

Structural adequacy  - is the loft floor strong enough to take people walking around, plus the weight of office furniture? (And can you get office furniture up those narrow stairs?)

Insulation - will that room get very cold in winter?

Fire safety - spread of fire and escape from fire

snowqueen555

eddddy said:

1. The installation of the staircase should have been signed-off by building control. If it wasn't, and it was installed within the last 12 months, that may be a problem. If it was done more than 12 months ago, you might just need indemnity insurance.

2. Is the roof space demised with the flat? i.e. Will it actually belong to you - or does it belong to the freeholder? If it belongs to the freeholder, and the freeholder finds out you're using it, they might tell you to stop using it.

3. Did the leaseholder get consent from the freeholder to install that staircase (if it was installed after the lease was first granted). It might be a problem if it was installed without consent.

It's a house converted into 2 flats, so top floor flat will have the loft, it's a criss cross lease apparently, the lease is being written up now for 999 years. 

Both flats are being let and the owner is now selling up.

eddddy

snowqueen555 said:

It's a house converted into 2 flats, so top floor flat will have the loft, it's a criss cross lease apparently, the lease is being written up now for 999 years. 

Both flats are being let and the owner is now selling up.

OK - so you're saying that somebody owns the whole building/house, and they're creating new leases.

I'm surprised that they're choosing to do a criss-cross lease. (Is the property in Tyneside?). People say that they are a headache - lots of conveyancing solicitors have never come across them and some mortgage lenders don't like them.

I'd have thought that what estate agents call a "Shared Freehold" would be a better option.

snowqueen555

To be honest it is a bit confusing, I understand the person on the bottom owns the freehold to the top and vice versa or something along those lines. They are rare but they do exist. There will be 0 service charges and ground rent, the setup is 50/50 for any building repairs etc.

Would any issues relating to planning/building regs be picked up during conveyancing etc. I don't want to have any issues in the future.

Thanks

lincroft1710

Nothing to stop the sale going ahead, but do make sure the loft area "belongs" to the flat. Looking at the photos I don't  think the loft meets building regs for a habitable room. Therefore your use of it as anything but storage would be at your own risk.

eddddy

snowqueen555 said:

To be honest it is a bit confusing, I understand the person on the bottom owns the freehold to the top and vice versa or something along those lines. 

Yep - that's more or less how criss-cross leases work. As I say, I think I'd prefer to avoid them.  I see them as a relic from the past, which are outdated. A shared freehold seems better. (But maybe there are good reasons for them.)

I took a quick look at what mortgage lenders say about them - and, actually, it seems that most are OK with them:
See: https://lendershandbook.ukfinance.org.uk/lenders-handbook/englandandwales/question-list/2057/

snowqueen555 said:

Would any issues relating to planning/building regs be picked up during conveyancing etc. I don't want to have any issues in the future.

If you're buying with a mortgage, the mortgage lender's valuer might say that your solicitor needs to see a building regs compliance certificate, if the stairs look like a later addition. (But as I say, Indemnity insurance might be acceptable instead.)

user1977

snowqueen555 said:

Would any issues relating to planning/building regs be picked up during conveyancing etc.

Yes, that's a significant part of the process, not something you need to separately worry about and sort out yourself.

ProDave

Building regs do allow a staircase serving a single room to be narrower than normal staircases, but I doubt a building inspector has ever seen this staircase.

canaldumidi

There's no way that complies with Building Regs. Having said that, BRs can only be enforced within 12 months of completion of the work (though mortgage lenders often insist on indemnity insurance).

But that's not what my concern would be.

BRs are there for good reasons one of which is safety, and no way would I risk my life spending time up there. In a fire you'd be struggling to get out.

If you need a study, buy a flat with a study, not a flat with a fire hazzard......

markin

If the is an escape window and you don't sleep in it, just have a rope ladder ready

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Firechief-Lightweight-Emergency-Situations-Foldable/dp/B08W2MF169/