Improvements in Shared ownership home

RHemmings

cmbrookes said:

RHemmings said:

cmbrookes said:

It isn't a structural change. The media wall will be made from MDF wood. It can easily be taken down and put back to it's original state before it was erected. The Lease does say that I'd need permission so that is what I have done, I have asked for permission but I thought that as I own 25% I'd at least have some sort of say in it otherwise what is the point in me owning a share if I don't get a say in improving the home?

It seems to me, therefore, that the HA has interpreted your request as it being a structure change. By the fact that you have asked permission. In your OP you don't mention that it isn't a structural change, just 'don't I have any say in this'?

I had a look at definitions of structural changes to a house in relation to non-load bearing walls. And opinion seems to be divided as to whether adding a non-load bearing wall is a structural change or not. You could say to the HA that the wall will be non-load bearing and hence that should not be a structural change, and hence their permission is not required. 

cmbrookes said:

They have said "Our guidance does not allow alteration or addition of partition or external walls, nor does it allow for any alterations to radiators or heating". I don't think this is reasonable just say their guidance does not allow it.

Is there anything in the agreement you signed mentioning this guidance? I don't think they can unilaterally add (effectively) terms unless there is something in there. 

The lease does say "not to make any alterations or addition of non structural nature to the interior with out written consent". This includes fixing which would mean the radiator wouldn't it? 

Oh dear, that sounds very all-encompassing. I think you would have to go the route of saying that their refusal is not reasonable. But, it sounds to my non-expert ear as if they are covered, and will be able to refuse. 

user1977

RHemmings said:

cmbrookes said:

RHemmings said:

cmbrookes said:

It isn't a structural change. The media wall will be made from MDF wood. It can easily be taken down and put back to it's original state before it was erected. The Lease does say that I'd need permission so that is what I have done, I have asked for permission but I thought that as I own 25% I'd at least have some sort of say in it otherwise what is the point in me owning a share if I don't get a say in improving the home?

It seems to me, therefore, that the HA has interpreted your request as it being a structure change. By the fact that you have asked permission. In your OP you don't mention that it isn't a structural change, just 'don't I have any say in this'?

I had a look at definitions of structural changes to a house in relation to non-load bearing walls. And opinion seems to be divided as to whether adding a non-load bearing wall is a structural change or not. You could say to the HA that the wall will be non-load bearing and hence that should not be a structural change, and hence their permission is not required. 

cmbrookes said:

They have said "Our guidance does not allow alteration or addition of partition or external walls, nor does it allow for any alterations to radiators or heating". I don't think this is reasonable just say their guidance does not allow it.

Is there anything in the agreement you signed mentioning this guidance? I don't think they can unilaterally add (effectively) terms unless there is something in there. 

The lease does say "not to make any alterations or addition of non structural nature to the interior with out written consent". This includes fixing which would mean the radiator wouldn't it? 

Oh dear, that sounds very all-encompassing. I think you would have to go the route of saying that their refusal is not reasonable. But, it sounds to my non-expert ear as if they are covered, and will be able to refuse. 

If their consent is not to be unreasonably withheld then the onus is on the HA to justify their refusal, which they haven't so far done.

RHemmings

user1977 said:

RHemmings said:

cmbrookes said:

RHemmings said:

cmbrookes said:

It isn't a structural change. The media wall will be made from MDF wood. It can easily be taken down and put back to it's original state before it was erected. The Lease does say that I'd need permission so that is what I have done, I have asked for permission but I thought that as I own 25% I'd at least have some sort of say in it otherwise what is the point in me owning a share if I don't get a say in improving the home?

It seems to me, therefore, that the HA has interpreted your request as it being a structure change. By the fact that you have asked permission. In your OP you don't mention that it isn't a structural change, just 'don't I have any say in this'?

I had a look at definitions of structural changes to a house in relation to non-load bearing walls. And opinion seems to be divided as to whether adding a non-load bearing wall is a structural change or not. You could say to the HA that the wall will be non-load bearing and hence that should not be a structural change, and hence their permission is not required. 

cmbrookes said:

They have said "Our guidance does not allow alteration or addition of partition or external walls, nor does it allow for any alterations to radiators or heating". I don't think this is reasonable just say their guidance does not allow it.

Is there anything in the agreement you signed mentioning this guidance? I don't think they can unilaterally add (effectively) terms unless there is something in there. 

The lease does say "not to make any alterations or addition of non structural nature to the interior with out written consent". This includes fixing which would mean the radiator wouldn't it? 

Oh dear, that sounds very all-encompassing. I think you would have to go the route of saying that their refusal is not reasonable. But, it sounds to my non-expert ear as if they are covered, and will be able to refuse. 

If their consent is not to be unreasonably withheld then the onus is on the HA to justify their refusal, which they haven't so far done.

Yes, but my answer was based upon my guess (just a guess) that they will be able to do so. And, their guidelines may be part of that. Particularly if their guidelines, or a similar early version, were available before the OP purchased. 

fullyrendered

It is likely the application for consent has been dealt with by a non technical member of the home ownership team.

If their response offers no direction on how to appeal the decision I would suggest raising a formal complaint, the stage 1 complaint would be dealt with by a manager. They might change their mind, or provide clearer reasoning for the decline, not least an excerpt from a written policy that is applied to every resident, and is therefore fair in that regard.

cmbrookes

fullyrendered said:

It is likely the application for consent has been dealt with by a non technical member of the home ownership team.

If their response offers no direction on how to appeal the decision I would suggest raising a formal complaint, the stage 1 complaint would be dealt with by a manager. They might change their mind, or provide clearer reasoning for the decline, not least an excerpt from a written policy that is applied to every resident, and is therefore fair in that regard.

The decision was made by their asset surveyor. 

fullyrendered

cmbrookes said:

fullyrendered said:

It is likely the application for consent has been dealt with by a non technical member of the home ownership team.

If their response offers no direction on how to appeal the decision I would suggest raising a formal complaint, the stage 1 complaint would be dealt with by a manager. They might change their mind, or provide clearer reasoning for the decline, not least an excerpt from a written policy that is applied to every resident, and is therefore fair in that regard.

The decision was made by their asset surveyor. 

OK, so my second paragraph applies, to ensure their decision making is in line with a stated consistent policy.

iza_belle1

Just out of interest, I wonder what would happen if the OP just went ahead and made the alterations? How would the HA know? Do they do inspections?  As the work is not invasive and could easily be returned back to how it
was originally  if the OP wanted to sell for example. 

cmbrookes

iza_belle1 said:

Just out of interest, I wonder what would happen if the OP just went ahead and made the alterations? How would the HA know? Do they do inspections?  As the work is not invasive and could easily be returned back to how it
was originally  if the OP wanted to sell for example. 

They are entitled to carry out inspections on the property at anytime as long as they give notice. I don't think they make a habit of it unless they become suspicious of anything. They'd also eventually find out I'd imagine when I come to staircase and need to get the house revalued. 

newsgroupmonkey_

From another viewpoint, removing a radiator, particularly in a living area, could change the EPC?

I mean, if you were moving the radiator a few feet, I can understand why you would be annoyed, but removing one is definitely going to have an impact to the efficiency of the heating in that particular room.

cmbrookes

newsgroupmonkey_ said:

From another viewpoint, removing a radiator, particularly in a living area, could change the EPC?

I mean, if you were moving the radiator a few feet, I can understand why you would be annoyed, but removing one is definitely going to have an impact to the efficiency of the heating in that particular room.

A brand new energy efficient electric fire would compensate for the heat loss. They are really good. It would be built into the media wall. They are a lot better than central heating and heat the room a lot quicker but I do see where you are coming from.