Misled about roof / roof space being included in flat

blueberry_a7_b7

Hey everyone

We’re two months into buying a share-of-freehold converted flat in London (£435k). The seller and EA claimed they owned the roof and attic space, which was a major selling point—especially as they said there's potential to extend due to ownership (adding 15-20% square footage).

Now, their solicitor has confirmed they do not own the roof, and the attic space isn’t even included in the lease.

We know options like a deed of variation exist, but if the seller can't secure agreement from the other freeholders, we'll need to revise our offer.

How could we value this lost potential?

Flat price: £435k

Size (excl. loft): 120sqm (i.e. £3.6k per sqm)

Loft space: 15-20sqm (inhabitable, no planning permission)

Since we were sold the idea of ownership and extension potential, do we have grounds to argue the potential value lost as a habitable space? (i.e. £3.6k*15sqm). Or would we down-value the cost per sqm by some amount to account for it being inhabitable and multiply? e.g. £2k*15 sqm

Or is there a professional we would need to speak to, to appropriately value it for us?

I imagine in future if we decide to approach the freeholders they'll want a hefty premium or share of any potential increased value if we want the roof / roof space for an extension.

Any advice appreciated—thanks!

user1977

Surely you don't need to "value the lost potential", you just value the flat as it currently is?

Or to put it another way, how much extra did you offer because of the loft space?

FlorayG

I don't think it works like that, with mathematics; it works on what you WANT and what you are prepared to pay. It's all subjective. I'm assuming you still want the flat even without the possibility of extending? In which case, how much is it worth to you as it really is? Will you be happy to walk away if the seller won't reduce the price?
There's no specific calculation required

DullGreyGuy

blueberry_a7_b7 said:

We’re two months into buying a share-of-freehold converted flat in London (£435k). The seller and EA claimed they owned the roof and attic space, which was a major selling point—especially as they said there's potential to extend due to ownership (adding 15-20% square footage).

Now, their solicitor has confirmed they do not own the roof, and the attic space isn’t even included in the lease.

I may be being a bit of a pedant here but if its share of freehold then who the hell does own the roof if its not jointly owned by your sellers and the other freeholders? 

Where is the current access to the attic? How many units in the building? How many units on the top floor? Are all the units share of freehold or are some purely leasehold?

Are you sure the "potential to extend" wasnt caveated with "with the relevant permissions" or something equally nebulous that could include permission from the other freeholders?

blueberry_a7_b7

DullGreyGuy said:

blueberry_a7_b7 said:

We’re two months into buying a share-of-freehold converted flat in London (£435k). The seller and EA claimed they owned the roof and attic space, which was a major selling point—especially as they said there's potential to extend due to ownership (adding 15-20% square footage).

Now, their solicitor has confirmed they do not own the roof, and the attic space isn’t even included in the lease.

I may be being a bit of a pedant here but if its share of freehold then who the hell does own the roof if its not jointly owned by your sellers and the other freeholders? 

Where is the current access to the attic? How many units in the building? How many units on the top floor? Are all the units share of freehold or are some purely leasehold?

Are you sure the "potential to extend" wasnt caveated with "with the relevant permissions" or something equally nebulous that could include permission from the other freeholders?

The property is jointly owned by the sellers and other freeholders, though it was initially suggested the sellers solely owned the roof and attic space. Since they don’t, extending would require negotiating with the other freeholders and paying a premium. As the sellers cannot sell what they don’t own, we need to exclude the roof’s value from our offer.

Access to the attic is solely through the seller's flat. Four units in the building. All are SOF.

Nope, no caveats. They thought they owned it, or at minimum the roof space - they put a new boiler up there and stuck a flue through the roof without permission of other freeholders (not realising they didn't own it  ). But solicitor has flagged they can't legally do that and it could all be dispute / required to move.

FlorayG said:

I don't think it works like that, with mathematics; it works on what you WANT and what you are prepared to pay. It's all subjective. I'm assuming you still want the flat even without the possibility of extending? In which case, how much is it worth to you as it really is? Will you be happy to walk away if the seller won't reduce the price?
There's no specific calculation required

Ah I see, that makes sense! I just figured the EA would ask for something more official in terms of valuing the space.

gwynlas

It miight be ossible for you to purchase the  attic  space from other sharers of freehold, it depends wha they think of your flat becoming larger and thus habitable by extra people.

If you were to convert then you would generally be solely responsible for roof maintenance rather than it being a shared expense

blueberry_a7_b7

gwynlas said:

It miight be ossible for you to purchase the  attic  space from other sharers of freehold, it depends wha they think of your flat becoming larger and thus habitable by extra people.

Yep, our solicitor has suggested a deed of variation is possible but that it would mean the seller needs to speak to the other freeholders, negotiate a price, etc. We'd feel more comfortable doing this ourselves after we own the property, to be honest, given the current situation.

Albermarle

Access to the attic is solely through the seller's flat

I guess you could still use it for general storage, as nobody else would know ( or probably care)

they put a new boiler up there and stuck a flue through the roof without permission of other freeholders (not realising they didn't own it   ). But solicitor has flagged they can't legally do that and it could all be dispute / required to move.

On the other hand you might have to find space in the flat for the boiler , and pay the cost of moving it. 

LoopyLoops

blueberry_a7_b7 said:

gwynlas said:

It miight be ossible for you to purchase the  attic  space from other sharers of freehold, it depends wha they think of your flat becoming larger and thus habitable by extra people.

Yep, our solicitor has suggested a deed of variation is possible but that it would mean the seller needs to speak to the other freeholders, negotiate a price, etc. We'd feel more comfortable doing this ourselves after we own the property, to be honest, given the current situation.

But isn’t your seller going to need to approach the freeholders now, to sort out the boiler issue?  You don’t want to move in, then find out the freeholders insist you move your boiler and repair any damage done with the flue etc.  I would have thought your solicitor would insist on this being sorted before  exchange.  

blueberry_a7_b7

LoopyLoops said:

blueberry_a7_b7 said:

gwynlas said:

It miight be ossible for you to purchase the  attic  space from other sharers of freehold, it depends wha they think of your flat becoming larger and thus habitable by extra people.

Yep, our solicitor has suggested a deed of variation is possible but that it would mean the seller needs to speak to the other freeholders, negotiate a price, etc. We'd feel more comfortable doing this ourselves after we own the property, to be honest, given the current situation.

But isn’t your seller going to need to approach the freeholders now, to sort out the boiler issue?  You don’t want to move in, then find out the freeholders insist you move your boiler and repair any damage done with the flue etc.  I would have thought your solicitor would insist on this being sorted before  exchange.  

Yes, the boiler issue specifically will need to be dealt with before we exchange.

However, this can potentially be managed with a letter from the freeholders giving us permission for the boiler or, as I understand it, the DoV would only specifically be to allow the boiler and flue to be up there, rather than a negotiation for the full roof space which is more complex.

eddddy

Perhaps the lowest risk approach is as follows...

Find out how much premium/costs the other joint freeholders want for...

• 'Selling' the roof space
• Preparing a Deed of Variation for your lease (i.e. their solicitor's fee, etc)
• Possibly preparing Deeds of Variation for the other leases (to deal with maintenance/repair responsibilities etc)
• Giving consent for conversion of the roof space

For example, let's say the other joint freeholders want £70k for all the above.

So your overall offer remains at £435k - of which £365k goes to the flat seller, and £70k goes to the other joint freeholders.

And you instruct your solicitor to synchronise the 2 transactions - so that you don't end up with the flat, but no roof space (or vice versa).