PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING

Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.

Property Lease/Moving House Advice

Background
:
My Wife and I own a leasehold flat in 2014. The property itself has been in my family for
over thirty years. My grandparents owned the property from around 1984 until my
nans death in 2008. My sister then bought the property in probate in 2008. She owned it until
2014 whereby I bought it. We are now selling.
When we were agreeing to the sale we were asked if any works had been done on the
property and I noted that the loft had been converted circa 30 years ago. The loft
conversion had nothing structurally changed but was boarded and a skylight put into the roof.
As per the lease the freeholder owns the roof as his demise. Whilst selling, the
freeholder has now said that they want a premium for giving consent for works to be
completed.

Issues:

1. The freeholder now was not the freeholder at the time of the works being
completed. He cannot confirm if authorisation was given or not.
2. I have witnesses who would testify that the works were requested to be
completed as an agreement between my grandparents and & the then freeholder.
3. They would also testify they were completed circa 30+ years ago.
3. We extended the lease in 2016, whereby a survey was completed on the
property, which obviously had the loft conversion already in place.
4. The freeholder is asking for a variation of the lease to include the roof because
we breached the covenant. WE did not breach the covenant. He won't give any
consent for sale until we pay. He thinks we have done the work whilst we've been there.
5. The freeholder has requested "capital sum based on the additional value to his
property less the cost of works". How could that be less the cost of work? We
didn't do the work so can't less the cost. The works were already taken into
consideration when we extended the lease (as per pt.3), so there can't be any more to pay
surely? The marriage total to pay for the extension was based on the value of
the property at the time.

Please help! Thank you in advance.
«1

Comments

  • sourcrates
    sourcrates Posts: 28,711
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Photogenic
    Ambassador
    Hi,

    We move posts if they are in the wrong forum, or will get more help elsewere.
    If you have any questions about this policy please email : [EMAIL="forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com"]forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL]

    Thanks
    I’m a Forum Ambassador and I support the Forum Team on the Debt free wannabe, Credit file and ratings, and Bankruptcy and living with it boards. If you need any help on these boards, do let me know. Please note that Ambassadors are not moderators. Any posts you spot in breach of the Forum Rules should be reported via the report button, or by emailing forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com. All views are my own and not the official line of MoneySavingExpert.For free non-judgemental debt advice, contact either Stepchange, National Debtline, or CitizensAdviceBureaux.Link to SOA Calculator- https://www.stoozing.com/soa.php The "provit letter" is here-https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2607247/letter-when-you-know-nothing-about-about-the-debt-aka-prove-it-letter
  • SmashedAvacado
    SmashedAvacado Posts: 1,262
    First Post First Anniversary
    Forumite
    As per the lease the freeholder owns the roof as his demise

    It would be helpful if you could clarify what you mean by this. do you mean that you don't own the loft space that you are using, or just that the roof is part of the freehold but not the lease?

    It would be helpful if you could cut and paste the definition of "property / demised premises" or simliar from your lease (it will have a list of things that are / are not included).

    Step 1 with this issue is to decide whether you are trying to regularise works that did not have consent or whether you are occupying part of the property to which you don't have a formally recorded right. Neither of these issues are fatal, but firstly we need to know your situation in a bit more detail.
  • dodds23
    dodds23 Posts: 16 Forumite
    Thank you for your reply.

    "It would be helpful if you could clarify what you mean by this. do you mean that you don't own the loft space that you are using, or just that the roof is part of the freehold but not the lease?"

    The lease says :

    "(xiv) That no alteration or addition shall be made in or to the structure or exterior of the demised premises".

    It also says :

    "The first schedule above referred to"...."interior faces of the walls bounding the demised premises and the floor and ceiling thereof but excluding the main structural parts and the external parts of the property and the roof and foundations thereof"

    I conclude from that that the loft space forms part of our leasehold? If the above is not sufficient I can send this to you privately.

    I am not wholly sure what we are doing in truth, We don't use the space as we just use it as a loft for all our excess stuff...We enquired about doing a proper conversion 2 or 3 years ago but were told it would be very expensive as essentially it is a loft that's been boarded so would be a full conversion etc. Nothing structurally has been changed. I am led to believe the big issue here is that a skylight has been erected in our freeholders demise, the roof. No other issue.

    Thank you in advance
  • davidmcn
    davidmcn Posts: 23,596
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    Forumite
    dodds23 wrote: »
    The lease says :

    "(xiv) That no alteration or addition shall be made in or to the structure or exterior of the demised premises".

    It also says :

    "The first schedule above referred to"...."interior faces of the walls bounding the demised premises and the floor and ceiling thereof but excluding the main structural parts and the external parts of the property and the roof and foundations thereof"

    I conclude from that that the loft space forms part of our leasehold?
    What does the lease define as the "demised premises"?
  • dodds23
    dodds23 Posts: 16 Forumite
    lease says :

    "The expression 'the demised premises' means the maisonette and garage described in the first schedule hereto".
  • davidmcn
    davidmcn Posts: 23,596
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    Forumite
    dodds23 wrote: »
    lease says :

    "The expression 'the demised premises' means the maisonette and garage described in the first schedule hereto".
    Well, we're getting there slowly...what does the description in the first schedule say?
  • dodds23
    dodds23 Posts: 16 Forumite
    The description in the first schedule is all about rates, taxes, charges etc etc. The only references to the demised premises description are as above & mainly

    "The first schedule above referred to"...."interior faces of the walls bounding the demised premises and the floor and ceiling thereof but excluding the main structural parts and the external parts of the property and the roof and foundations thereof"

    I can send you the whole lease if you'd prefer? But I can only send as I see.
  • davidmcn
    davidmcn Posts: 23,596
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    Forumite
    Seems a bit odd that it only describes the premises as being "the maisonette and garage" without even specifying where in the world it is, never mind whether the maisonette includes the attic (which is what we were wondering about).
  • SmashedAvacado
    SmashedAvacado Posts: 1,262
    First Post First Anniversary
    Forumite
    I would argue this (i can't categorically say i am right because your lease isnt clear, but this would be my position):

    1. The loft is part of my leased premises
    2. The roof-light may or may not have been put in by an earlier tenant (and may or may not have had consent), but the landlord in granting the new lease (the lease extension) has acquiesced its existence and therefore is estopped from taking action in respect of it.
    3. as such neither of the use of the loft or the existence of a roof light is an issue requiring landlord's consent / action
  • dodds23
    dodds23 Posts: 16 Forumite
    SmashedAvacado : I agree. I think considering the lease extension was voluntarily agreed by the freeholder, they have subsequently waived their right to disagree now, or at least to charge a premium based upon the value the conversion adds when it is already incorporated.
    I think that is the main bone of contention, the lease isn't clear, It simply on a number of occasions refers to 'the roof'.
    However, the covenant has been broken and I understand that the breach isn't with the person who did it, but with the property itself.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards