Downstairs co-freeholder wants to repoint just the lower half of building

MonkeyMonkTed

Our co-freeholder is proposing to repoint the lower half of our building, regardless of whether we want the whole building done or not. We are not against doing it but find it odd that they are proposing to do all the lower-half bricks rather than simply repair the problematic parts. 

Surely, if they did this, it would look very odd. More importantly, isn't it a freeholder matter, meaning that both co-freeholders need to agree to it?

Thanks

Brie

Perhaps because they expect you to pay half for doing "their" half and then won't want to pay half for doing "yours"?

NameUnavailable

Why do they want to do it? Presumably there's a damp issue?

I would get a few builders to look at the brickword and advise - if it needs doing then I expect the whole lot needs doing and it would be a false economy to have a partial job (unless it's just a few localised areas of decay).

MonkeyMonkTed

Brie said:

Perhaps because they expect you to pay half for doing "their" half and then won't want to pay half for doing "yours"?

I don't think this is the case. But at the same time, because it is the walls and therefore a major structural element, I think it is a freeholder matter (ie we both have to agree to it). It just seems bizarre to suggest doing just the lower half. We're not even saying that we don't agree!

propertyrental

Are they expecting you to contribute to the cost?

What do your leases say regarding repairs of this nature? Some specify all leaseholders contribute to all structural works, some make a split between upper and lower halves of the building.

MonkeyMonkTed

NameUnavailable said:

Why do they want to do it? Presumably there's a damp issue?

I would get a few builders to look at the brickword and advise - if it needs doing then I expect the whole lot needs doing and it would be a false economy to have a partial job (unless it's just a few localised areas of decay).

Thank you. 

They say they have some damp. But my argument would be that they either patch up those areas or we repoint the entire building - something I am not necessarily opposed to. But surely, a full repointing of only the lower half of the building would not only be odd (and look odd) but is also a freeholder matter rather than a leaseholder matter?

MonkeyMonkTed

MonkeyMonkTed said:

NameUnavailable said:

Why do they want to do it? Presumably there's a damp issue?

I would get a few builders to look at the brickword and advise - if it needs doing then I expect the whole lot needs doing and it would be a false economy to have a partial job (unless it's just a few localised areas of decay).

Thank you. 

They say they have some damp. But my argument would be that they either patch up those areas or we repoint the entire building - something I am not necessarily opposed to. But surely, a full repointing of only the lower half of the building would not only be odd (and look odd) but is also a freeholder matter rather than a leaseholder matter?

PS we have had two builders round and neither have said the whole lot needs doing.

propertyrental

Please clarify. You say:

"Our co-freeholder is proposing to repoint the lower half of our building"

but now also say:

"surely, a full repointing of only the lower half of the building would not only be odd (and look odd) but is also a freeholder matter rather than a leaseholder matter?" implying the neighbour is doing this as leaseholder?

But more importantly, what do your leases say?

Stripey_Tiger

I think it's hard for anyone to answer this without knowing whether they're asking you to pay for it or not?

When I needed to repoint my flat due to damp problems, I spoke to the owner of the flat below mine and offered to just get my flat done and pay for it myself, and also gave him the option of getting the whole buildling done and splitting the cost. The lease said all maintenance of the outside of the building should be shared 50/50 and I was trying to avoid forcing him into shelling out money for something he might not want to spend money on, because repointing is expensive. But I needed this agreement in writing or else he could then later get his part of the building repointed and demand I pay half.

And yes it's technically the freeholder's responsibility, but if your freeholder is anything like mine, they won't lift a finger to do any maintenance if they don't absolutely have to, and if they do they will charge an arm and a leg for it. If you need urgent repairs done, sometimes it's easier to just sort it out yourself.

eddddy

MonkeyMonkTed said:

More importantly, isn't it a freeholder matter, meaning that both co-freeholders need to agree to it?

You need to check your lease to see who is responsible for maintenance and repairs of the external walls.

It's often the freeholder - so, as you say, as joint-freeholders you should both need to agree to repointing.



But realistically, what will you do if the joint freeholder goes ahead without your agreement?

The main options open to you include:

• Go to court to get an injunction to prevent the joint freeholder from doing the repointing

• Stand in the way of the builder when they arrive at the property - so they cannot do the repointing (But if it results in a breach of the peace, you might get arrested.)

• If the repointing is done, and you can demonstrate that it's resulted in a financial loss to you - you can sue your joint freeholder to recover your losses

The bottom line is that if joint-freeholders don't "play together nicely", it's very difficult to do anything about it.

GDB2222

Is  the upstairs more expensive, because of scaffolding?