Freeholder built penthouse in 2012. Leaseholders now served S20 to fix issues with the roof

moneydispute

Hi - I'm a leaseholder of one of the flats in a 3-storey block of 24 flats which were built in 2005.

In 2011, the freeholder applied for planning permission to build a 4th storey which served as an extension to his flat. (Planning can be seen here - (Removed by Forum Team)

He then sold the flat for a significant profit, but remains a freeholder.

Fast forward to present day, we've just been served the 2nd notice of a S20 for a complete re-roof. The cost is coming in at around £350K, which most likely means each leaseholder will need to pay £15-20K. The roof is apparently in a poor state and there have been leaks in the building.

We've been told (via Dexters - the property managers), that there's no guarantee on any part of the roof (i.e. neither the original roof or the subsequent works in 2011).

Whilst we're still awaiting further details on the exact details on the 2011/2012 works, it looks to me from the planning that the entire roof has effectively been repurposed for the penthouse and very little of the original roof remains. The freeholder should have instructed component contractors at the time that would have provided a 25 year guarantee.

It appears to me that the freeholder has made a huge profit on the sale of his flat based on an extension/roof works with no guarantee, and now that there's issues with the roof - the rest of us are expected to pay for them.

Looking for advice here on where we stand and what steps to take next.

eddddy

Taking a step back...

In simple terms, typically you will be responsible for contributing to the maintenance of the building - as the building was when the lease was first granted.

Presumably, the 4th storey didn't exist when your lease was first granted - so you shouldn't have to contribute to any maintenance of the 4th storey (including its roof).


Unless.... your lease was varied (i.e. changed) when the 4th storey was built, to say that you would become responsible for contributing to it's maintenance. 

moneydispute

The penthouse doesn't cover the full surface area of the 3rd storey roof, and I believe it's the 3rd storey roof which requires works, so in principle we are responsible for that.

Unless, and this is me speculating, we can show freeholder negligence, especially when used to help line his own pockets.

eddddy

You really need to drop the comments like "the freeholder has made a huge profit on the sale of his flat" and "especially when used to help line his own pockets" from your argument.

That's not relevant - and it makes it sound like you are arguing because you are jealous of the freeholder, because they made a chunk of money.


Perhaps the angle you should focus on is...

• The law says Service Charges (i.e. the cost of repairs) must be "reasonable" - so you need to argue that this Service Charge Bill wouldn't be reasonable, because the repairs should not be necessary.

• i.e. The repairs are required to the roof, because the freeholder was negligent. The freeholder failed to have the roof reconstructed correctly, when the freeholder built the penthouse.

• If the freeholder hadn't been negligent, you wouldn't have a repair bill now.

(I'm not sure that failing to get a 25 year guarantee is relevant. You didn't have a 25 year guarantee before the penthouse was built - so you are no worse off.)

user1977

moneydispute said:

The freeholder should have instructed component contractors at the time that would have provided a 25 year guarantee.

According to whom? Does the rest of the building have 25 year guarantees?

Mstty

25 year guarantee? Where is this coming from?

Even a new build will only come with a maximum 10 year guarantee (including the roof)

You appear to be fixated with the freeholder.and his profit rather than perhaps talking to everyone in the building and finding out what the issues have been to I presume the upper flats?

It also now appears that this is not the roof of the newer 4th Storey but the 3rd Storey listed in your leasehold?

I would have thought any damage created by the 4th storey would have been evident from 2012 onwards? Unless any of that 3rd storey was converted into a flat roof or changed

But regardless have a chat with neighbours and see what the full story is.

However £350k is a lot of money for a roof.

dannim12345

I used to work for a flat roofing contractor (assuming it’s a flat roof), 25 year guarantee is quite rare.  You do get manufacturer warrantees (10 years is most common) and you can sometimes get insurance backed guarantees (not sure if was for roofing though, as we did other work too).   

But in terms of claiming on them probably quite difficult, it wouldn’t cover poor installation or excessive wear & tear for example. 

ThisIsWeird

The link to the extension plans doesn't work - the site suggests it has been removed?

Is the repair required only to the remaining roof, the part that wasn't extended over by the FH?

£350k is a hell of a sum - how many quotes did the FH get? Are you in a position to get some guidance on likely cost?

moneydispute

ThisIsWeird said:

The link to the extension plans doesn't work - the site suggests it has been removed?

Is the repair required only to the remaining roof, the part that wasn't extended over by the FH?

£350k is a hell of a sum - how many quotes did the FH get? Are you in a position to get some guidance on likely cost?

Fixed link - (Removed by Forum Team)

Managing agent got 3 quotes. Suspect contractors naturally bloat these when dealing with managing agents so we're probably going to have to get our own quotes to prove that the 350K is unreasonable.

I believe the repairs are only to the remaining roof (although not particular clear from the documents we've been given)

moneydispute

These are the 2 section which relate to the roof (which account for around 225K of the cost (the next 70-100K is scaffolding)), so it's not clear to me if any of these works relate directly to the penthouse construction.

eddddy

moneydispute said:

Managing agent got 3 quotes. Suspect contractors naturally bloat these when dealing with managing agents so we're probably going to have to get our own quotes to prove that the 350K is unreasonable.

I believe the repairs are only to the remaining roof (although not particular clear from the documents we've been given)

If you want to challenge this, you need to be really focussed.

So far it sounds like you want to raise 2 completely separate arguments for why charging you for the repairs would not be "reasonable"....

• 1) The repairs to the roof are required because the freeholder was negligent in constructing the penthouse, so it's not reasonable that you should pay the repair costs

• 2) If argument 1 (above) fails, your follow up argument is that £350k is not a "reasonable" cost for the roof repairs that are required

In your position, I might start by writing something like this to the management company....

• "Do you have a surveyor's report (or other evidence) that confirms that the repairs to the roof are not required because of poor construction of the penthouse?

• Can you confirm that the repairs all relate to the original roof of the building, and none of the repairs relate to additions made to the building when the penthouse was built?"