Share of freehold bought without consent of freeholder?

HiroA

MattMattMattUK said:

A could sell their share of the freehold to the Ltd and then split the shares 50/50 with B for whatever value they decide. It sounds like the situations is now that you own 50%, the same as you originally did and rather than Human A owning the other 50% of the leasehold they sold it to Ltd, which they then split 50/50 between A and B, meaning you own 50% and A and B nominally own 25% each by way of a Ltd. There is nothing inherently wrong with that and it is only an issue of the freehold and/or leasehold agreement specifically prohibit the selling of the share of the freehold, otherwise there is no issue with what they have done.

If this is the case, the company should be a joint freeholder, and cannot have the authority or power it certifies on the Company Website, as if it fully owns the freehold?  

Our Declaration of Trust has a clause to transfer a one third of the freehold as tenants in common to B's flat's leaseholder upon request at the premium determined by A and myself (which as you can see I have been fighting against) - but could A still sell part of his share independently like this?   The DoT also has a clause that if any of us desire to sell /transfer the freehold interest the transferor ensure that transferee and other trustees enter into a similar trust deed and the other trustee will corporate in the transfer of the property.  I thought this would only happen when, say, A is selling the flat and is transfering the freehold to the new owner.

Am I going to receive a draft DoT to sign, and be told that they will go to court if I don't?  (The previous leaseholder was a trouble maker imo and he tried to do a similar thing with A, but they didnt succeed as it was not done lawfully, I took the solicitor who initiated the transaction to Legal Ombusdman and the previous leaseholder quickly sold his flat - then B came).

MattMattMattUK

HiroA said:

MattMattMattUK said:

A could sell their share of the freehold to the Ltd and then split the shares 50/50 with B for whatever value they decide. It sounds like the situations is now that you own 50%, the same as you originally did and rather than Human A owning the other 50% of the leasehold they sold it to Ltd, which they then split 50/50 between A and B, meaning you own 50% and A and B nominally own 25% each by way of a Ltd. There is nothing inherently wrong with that and it is only an issue of the freehold and/or leasehold agreement specifically prohibit the selling of the share of the freehold, otherwise there is no issue with what they have done.

If this is the case, the company should be a joint freeholder, and cannot have the authority or power it certifies on the Company Website, as if it fully owns the freehold? 

Nowhere on Companies House is there a declaration of authority, nor does it certify anything, neither would it state that it owns the freehold. 

HiroA said:
98000 - Residents property management

This does not mean that the company is declaring it owns the whole freehold, indeed there is no way to do such a thing on companies house. The activity code is also largely meaningless, although it will change slightly this autumn.

HiroA said:

Our Declaration of Trust has a clause to transfer a one third of the freehold as tenants in common to B's flat's leaseholder upon request at the premium determined by A and myself (which as you can see I have been fighting against) - but could A still sell part of his share independently like this?

Yes, they can.

HiroA said:
The DoT also has a clause that if any of us desire to sell /transfer the freehold interest the transferor ensure that transferee and other trustees enter into a similar trust deed and the other trustee will corporate in the transfer of the property.  I thought this would only happen when, say, A is selling the flat and is transfering the freehold to the new owner.

From reading your previous posts I suspect that it would be very easy for them to argue that you were being uncooperative as you seem to being deliberatly combative and even on here your posts are throwing around wild claims that are completly unsubstantiated and hugely incorrect assumptions.

HiroA said:
I thought this would only happen when, say, A is selling the flat and is transfering the freehold to the new owner.

I am almost certain you thought wrong, unless there is a clause that specifically prohibits separation of the lease hold and freehold ownership. That usually only happens in ex-council properties and even then it is rare. 

HiroA said:

Am I going to receive a draft DoT to sign, and be told that they will go to court if I don't? 

Maybe, maybe not, the existing deed of trust could have been transferred to the Ltd. Alternatively they could have done the first part and your leasehold and freehold agreements, together with the deed of trust compel you to sign.

HiroA said:
(The previous leaseholder was a trouble maker imo and he tried to do a similar thing with A, but they didnt succeed as it was not done lawfully, I took the solicitor who initiated the transaction to Legal Ombusdman and the previous leaseholder quickly sold his flat - then B came).

It is unclear what you actually think has happened though. You seem to think that something illegal has happened from the outset, you have jumped to the position that something criminal is going on and that is designed to misappropriate your property, but you have, at least according to this thread, zero evidence to back up that belief. It seems entirely based around "I don't like B". 

What do you actually think they have done, what do you think they are trying to do? From what I can see it seems that you are specifically trying to block the third leaseholder from obtaining a share of the freehold, something which the deed of trust specifically allows and indeed even stipulates how it should happen. It seems to go far beyond a disagreement about the value of that third of the freehold and you even mention in a previous post trying to impose additional conditions before doing that. 

flaneurs_lobster

Classic "noisy neighbour" dispute that has gone nuclear. Often happens when the parties are affluent enough to get lawyered-up early doors.

HiroA

MattMattMattUK said:

HiroA said:

MattMattMattUK said:

A could sell their share of the freehold to the Ltd and then split the shares 50/50 with B for whatever value they decide. It sounds like the situations is now that you own 50%, the same as you originally did and rather than Human A owning the other 50% of the leasehold they sold it to Ltd, which they then split 50/50 between A and B, meaning you own 50% and A and B nominally own 25% each by way of a Ltd. There is nothing inherently wrong with that and it is only an issue of the freehold and/or leasehold agreement specifically prohibit the selling of the share of the freehold, otherwise there is no issue with what they have done.

If this is the case, the company should be a joint freeholder, and cannot have the authority or power it certifies on the Company Website, as if it fully owns the freehold? 

Nowhere on Companies House is there a declaration of authority, nor does it certify anything, neither would it state that it owns the freehold. 

HiroA said:
98000 - Residents property management

This does not mean that the company is declaring it owns the whole freehold, indeed there is no way to do such a thing on companies house. The activity code is also largely meaningless, although it will change slightly this autumn.

HiroA said:

Our Declaration of Trust has a clause to transfer a one third of the freehold as tenants in common to B's flat's leaseholder upon request at the premium determined by A and myself (which as you can see I have been fighting against) - but could A still sell part of his share independently like this?

Yes, they can.

HiroA said:
The DoT also has a clause that if any of us desire to sell /transfer the freehold interest the transferor ensure that transferee and other trustees enter into a similar trust deed and the other trustee will corporate in the transfer of the property.  I thought this would only happen when, say, A is selling the flat and is transfering the freehold to the new owner.

From reading your previous posts I suspect that it would be very easy for them to argue that you were being uncooperative as you seem to being deliberatly combative and even on here your posts are throwing around wild claims that are completly unsubstantiated and hugely incorrect assumptions.

HiroA said:
I thought this would only happen when, say, A is selling the flat and is transfering the freehold to the new owner.

I am almost certain you thought wrong, unless there is a clause that specifically prohibits separation of the lease hold and freehold ownership. That usually only happens in ex-council properties and even then it is rare. 

HiroA said:

Am I going to receive a draft DoT to sign, and be told that they will go to court if I don't? 

Maybe, maybe not, the existing deed of trust could have been transferred to the Ltd. Alternatively they could have done the first part and your leasehold and freehold agreements, together with the deed of trust compel you to sign.

HiroA said:
(The previous leaseholder was a trouble maker imo and he tried to do a similar thing with A, but they didnt succeed as it was not done lawfully, I took the solicitor who initiated the transaction to Legal Ombusdman and the previous leaseholder quickly sold his flat - then B came).

It is unclear what you actually think has happened though. You seem to think that something illegal has happened from the outset, you have jumped to the position that something criminal is going on and that is designed to misappropriate your property, but you have, at least according to this thread, zero evidence to back up that belief. It seems entirely based around "I don't like B". 

What do you actually think they have done, what do you think they are trying to do? From what I can see it seems that you are specifically trying to block the third leaseholder from obtaining a share of the freehold, something which the deed of trust specifically allows and indeed even stipulates how it should happen. It seems to go far beyond a disagreement about the value of that third of the freehold and you even mention in a previous post trying to impose additional conditions before doing that. 

Well, all I asked for originally was my right for quiet enjoyment etc and leaseholders/freeholdes behaving as they are supposed to but they did not like it and do it.  B served S42 notice but withdrew and refused to pay landlord's fee which was their legal requirment.That is not good behaviour. B then informally asked to extend the lease but it had to be cancelled as they did not act as agreed. Continuous breaches of faith and agreements. As long as they have the long lease their flat value should be all right and I had given them chances. 

I cannot give the details of the Legal Ombudsman case with the previous leaseholder's transacction as I am prohibited to do that, but if he and their solicotor had been acting legally, B did not have to sell his flat quickly without lease extension or freehold buy in and their solicitor did not have to stop the transaction quickly.

The officer from the legal ombusdman did comment that, although my complaint was aginst the solicitor's firm, they could see there were lots of problems with the behavious of A and the previous leaseholder.  

HiroA

flaneurs_lobster said:

Classic "noisy neighbour" dispute that has gone nuclear. Often happens when the parties are affluent enough to get lawyered-up early doors.

At least I am not affluent and our property is not in a fancy area.  

sgthammer

This gets more complicated by the post.

It now transpires the dispute is only partially about noisy neighbours and predates B moving in at all, with a previous leaseholder having already cut and run.

How did the freehold come to be divided between only two of the three flats in the first place?

Just goes to show you should never buy leasehold.

HiroA

sgthammer said:

This gets more complicated by the post.

It now transpires the dispute is only partially about noisy neighbours and predates B moving in at all, with a previous leaseholder having already cut and run.

How did the freehold come to be divided between only two of the three flats in the first place?

Just goes to show you should never buy leasehold.

When the former landlord (company) offered us to sell the freehold, only A and I were interested.  C (the remaining leaseholder then) was not interested as they'd recently extended their lease and was selling it.  They did not think buying share of freehold would add a substantial value.  A was really unhappy that C did not participate, but I did not mind as we coud buy it at the rock bottom price. The former landlord wanted to sell it quickly. 

When we signed DoT I just did not expect that we could have leaseholders who would behave like that.  I am not affluent enough to be able to move freely, I'm old and quiet enjoyment etc is very important to me. It's also important to me that people I get involved with are trustworhy and behave reasonably.  

As A and B are not responding to me, I think it's natural for me to get suspicios, upset and fear the worst under these circumstances. 

Yes, I wish I can buy a freehold house!

HiroA

Petitepea said:

HiroA said:

Petitepea said:

@HiroA if you and 'A' shared the freehold 50/50 and as you are also leaseholders too, i think leaseholders only need agreement of 50% of said properties within a building to form a management company but I am not sure about how many properties need to agree when another leaseholder is wanting to purchase into the freehold? 

If you and 'A' shared the freehold 50/50 and as you are both leaseholders, then lets say if 'B' has purchased a share of the freehold via 'A' and it does transpire they should have also sought your permission too then of course seek legal advice.

Do you have a declaration/deed of trust? If so and it hasn't been adhered to then seek advice on this.

With regards to the noise if you and 'A' are freeholders then you can attempt to get 'B' to reduce the noise as this would be a breach of lease. But if 'B' has purchased a share of the freehold then I'm afraid there's not much that can be done to reduce the noise other than maybe speaking with your local council.

I think if other leaseholders are trying to set up a management company I will receive the notificiation of their application from the authority (if they are following a correct procedure).   We own the freehold as tennants in common by the Declaration of Trust, and no, it has not been adhered to. A does not want to have a lot to do with property management and refused to collaborate with me to resolve the nosie problem as landlord.  I have contacted the Council, but yes, this is the reason B is so keen to be a joint freeholder.   I have told him he was in breach, but all he did was to irrationally accuse that I was the one who was in breach. 

If the declaration of trust has not been adhered to, you may have to get legal advice esp if monies are outstanding.
Are there any disputes with service charges being paid, do 'A' and 'B' make regular payments of their share?

If 'A' doesn't want a lot to do with managing the property, then I don't understand why 'A' bought into a property knowing this would be the situation.
Maybe remind 'A' that he is lucky to have a flat/apartment that comes with a share of the freehold and being able to manage the building without the need for an external property management company who do little by maintenance but charge thousands per year, is a far better situation than being ripped off by management companies.

If what @MattMattMattUK has said is correct and 'A' has sold half/some of their share of the freehold to 'B', then look into if you have any stronger rights as a freeholder with 50% of the share meaning majority freeholder.

Overall though I would at least try and meditate between you all to resolve and come to an agreement over whatever has annoyed each of the leaseholders, as this will be far less costly than any legal route.

No outstanding service charge dispute. A didn't want to manage the property and left almost everything to me, but I have started demanding that he do landlord duties as well, which he has not been happy with. I did a quick serach and yes, if MattMatt is correct it looks like I would have the biggest power (and responsibility) among us as the majority freeholder,and it would also be benefitial when selling.  I think I just need to find out what A & B have been doing. I have also booked an appointment with LEASE.

HiroA

MattMattMattUK said:

A could sell their share of the freehold to the Ltd and then split the shares 50/50 with B for whatever value they decide. It sounds like the situations is now that you own 50%, the same as you originally did and rather than Human A owning the other 50% of the leasehold they sold it to Ltd, which they then split 50/50 between A and B, meaning you own 50% and A and B nominally own 25% each by way of a Ltd. There is nothing inherently wrong with that and it is only an issue of the freehold and/or leasehold agreement specifically prohibit the selling of the share of the freehold, otherwise there is no issue with what they have done.

It would be useful if you could let me know where you got the information, like website, document or from a lawyer ?  

HiroA

I rang the Land Registry this morning and could find out that no applications have been made for the property so far.  They sent me a link to "property alert" where you can check any siginifcat activities happening in relation to your property.

I think I will create a new thread to discuss the issue more specifically in terms of A selling the share to B like this.  I want to avoid court action etc of course, but if inevitable I might use Housing Ombudsman.