Where does the responsibility lie with this situation? Opinions please.

user1977

What was the deal when she was a tenant? Was the loft occupied as part of the flat, or mentioned in the tenancy agreement? If so then arguably it ought to have been included in the right to buy.

silvercar

How did the potential buyer find out? 

silvercar

Her best option is to get an independent valuation on the price of the roof space and then use that to negotiate with the owner of the freehold. Involve a local councillor if necessary. There should be a max value that isn’t excessive given it’s of no use to anyone else. 

The other argument is the freeholder said and did nothing while it was being built and all the time since, so arguably the price should be based on its value when the work started.  Think if you possess some land for X years and no one objects you can claim it, not sure how it works exactly with a flat.

Section62

silvercar said:

Her best option is to get an independent valuation on the price of the roof space and then use that to negotiate with the owner of the freehold. Involve a local councillor if necessary. There should be a max value that isn’t excessive given it’s of no use to anyone else. 

....

Approaching a councillor might be an idea if the council has done something wrong, or wasn't responding to the OP's letters/emails, or at a push if the council refused to discuss the possibility of selling the roof space.

But a councillor shouldn't get involved in a negotiation between a potentially buyer and the council officers with responsibility for negotiating a fair value.  Councillors cannot lobby for someone to get a beneficial deal, or anything less than the council achieving 'Best Value'.

As the council appears willing to consider a sale then involving a councillor risks that option being taken off the table, as it may become difficult for the officers to demonstate the deal hasn't been subject to undue influence.

Myci85

swingaloo said:

Neil49 said:

itsthelittlethings said:

swingaloo said:

35har1old said:

swingaloo said:

Thank you for the replies. 
2 differing thoughts already-
The first saying she should have checked and the 2nd saying the solicitor should advise.

We have all  been discussing it for ages this afternoon and none of us are really in agreement.

Who has the responsibility of maintaining the roof?

Thats another sticky point-

A year or so ago most of the property on the estate had work done on the roofs in 3 stages. Stage 1 and 2 were completed during which time my friend had been sent a letter telling her how much she was going to be expected to pay.
The tenant downstairs did not get a letter so from that would imply she was expected to contribute because she owned the roof?
However the 3rd phase of the work has been cancelled so she never had to pay anything. Does seem odd though, why she would be billed for it if it wasnt her responsibility.

Was the tenant downstairs a renter or an owner? Unless they owned they wouldn’t be expected to contribute.

You beat me to it but you are quite correct in what you say. If they are a tenant then they are not an owner and if renting from the council then the council would cover their share of the cost. 

Thats the point I was trying to make but I made it poorly I think. The downstairs occupier is a tenant so would not get a letter as he would not be paying. I think its confusing her why she would get a letter saying she has to pay if the council own the roof space. If they accept that she does not own the space then why send a letter asking her to pay as if she does own it.

Im going to tell her to have another look at er deeds and paperwork from when se bought the property as Im sure the answer is there and she has just not read it properly and made incorrect assumptions.

She wouldn't have been asked to pay because she owned the roof space, she would have been asked to contribute towards whole building maintenance/repairs because she owns the flat. Nothing to do with roof space ownership. Same as leasehold owners in any blocks of flats. 

loubel

" I think its confusing her why she would get a letter saying she has to pay if the council own the roof space. If they accept that she does not own the space then why send a letter asking her to pay as if she does own it."

Because that's how leasehold property ownership works. The freeholder (usually ) owns the structure of the building and is responsible for maintaining this but the leaseholders pay for the works.

pinkshoes

Only your friend is to blame.

If the deeds don't say you own it then you don't own it. End of. Quite clear.

You can apply for planning permission on anything. If it gets granted then you can only build if you actually own the land.

So your friend needs to either reverse the extension work, or negotiate the price by getting valuations.

If the ex was involved in these decisions then get him involved. E.g  he pays back the money or pays half to get the work done.

Baldytyke88

swingaloo said:

Messy situation-

They really want to move but are stuck there with things as they are at the moment. There has been a discussion about getting a 'Deed of Variation?) but apparently that is quite costly.

She feels the council should have told her when she applied for planning permission that it was not her property to convert. The council say that property sale and planning are 2 different departments so planning would not know she didn't own the roof space even though it was ex council property.
 
Her partner wants to see a solicitor to try to establish blame because he says that 'either way she is going to lose thousands for something that is not her fault'.  Im not sure that doing that wont just be throwing money away.

Can I ask for opinions please. Thank you.

Your friend does not own the roof space and its her own fault she is unaware of that. If she tells the council what has happened, it will be costly for her.

A deed of variation is not an option here, this has been a very costly learning experience for your friend.

A friend was going to buy his council flat, but he decided not to because of the costs of maintaining the roof etc.

In most leasehold flat ownership scenarios, the freeholder (landlord) typically owns the roof and is responsible for its maintenance and repairs.

mark_cycling00

I think it's common for FTBs to assume they own unused roof space and not be aware that your lease may not include it.

I a previous estate where I lived, some people negotiated a cost with the freeholder when it came to selling their place when they'd extended into the roof. 

As mentioned by someone else, you might be able to buy the space now.
The council may have a "can't be arsed" attitude though or have reasonable reasons for not setting a precedent for selling roof space.

Out of interest, what do your water bills say about rainwater? Do you pay for all of what falls on your roof or is it shared with apartments below you?

If the lease wasn't clear but other official documents implied that you owned it then you might get some sympathy from the authorities 

FlorayG

Gosh that's so sad but I agree with everyone else, there's no comeback on anyone else, it's all the flat owners 'fault' for not completing due diligence. Planning only deal with planning issues. Builders just do what they are told. The solicitor would have assumed all required details were sorted out. The fact that the council made repairs to the roof and sent the flat owner an invoice for part of the cost clearly shows that the council still own the roof