Indemnity Insurance

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Indemnity Insurance

    I am having trouble getting details of some change made to a leasehold I am going to buy these changes were made many years ago, should I get Indemnity Insurance as advised by my solicitor?

    Also the boiler system in the property was not done by a licensed plummer so there is no certificate, can I get a cert if a pay a plummer to come and check it?

    Thanks

    #2
    Without knowing what the lease says, what the changes are, how long ago they were made and whether the landlord has notice of them, it is not possible to answer your question. You can ask your solicitor: (a) Do I need this insurance and if so why? (b) Should the seller not be paying for it?

    As to the boiler system it would be wise to have it checked by an appropriate professional.

    Comment


      #3
      I will write what is written in the charge register:

      A conveyance of the freehold estate dated 3 august 1865 made between (1) Persons name (2) persons name and (3) persons name contains restrictive covenants but neither the original deed nor a certified copy or examined abstract there of was produced on first registration.

      My solicitor wrote to me:

      I asked for an indemnity policy for the missing document referred to at entry 1 of the charges register, which the sellers are not prepared to provide, which is understandable in view of the date of the document.
      The risk is that these unknown covenants come to light and someone with the benefits tries enforce, albeit a very small risk. For this, I can arrange an indemnity insurance policy to protect you, see attached.
      This will cost £210. This is a matter which may arise when you sell too.



      What do you think?


      Also there is no FENSA cert for new windows installed, although they have been in for more than 1 year and similar windows now exist in other flats in the street.

      Comment


        #4
        Not quite what I thought as the covenant affects the freehold.

        If I were buying I would not take out the insurance.

        If you are of a very nervous disposition take out the insurance.

        Comment


          #5
          Their are also a few other things that I have to deal with, I shall write them down:


          From solicitor to sellers solicitor:

          With regards to the lease, this refers to a right of way over the brown area but we can only see green and purple colouring. Is there any brown on the lease plan?



          Why is there no brown colouring is the usual for this to be like this? All the other colour boundaries seem to fit in with the lease.


          Another issue:

          From solicitor to sellers solicitor:

          We note that the deed of 30th march 1988 incorrectly refers to the under-lease dated 23rd August 1957 instead of 21st March 1958. How has this not been picked up previously? Please arrange for a further deed of rectification.

          What do you make of this?

          Comment


            #6
            First that you seem to have a meticulous solicitor. Secondly, not a lot I am afraid without seeing the documents. Discrepancies of the sort described are not uncommon. The question is whether they are significant. Your solicitor who has read all the documents is the best person to advise.

            Comment


              #7
              I reread the lease covering the colouring of the right of way, it mentions the colour brown as a shared right of way but it also says "if any", now as there is no brown on the plans I take it that there isn't any, yet my lawyer seems to be waiting for a reply on this matter.
              Looking on the plans everything looks to be in order, I don't know whether I should tell the lawyer to not dwell on this matter.

              Comment


                #8
                I can only repeat that without seeing the documents it is difficult to comment. It does though sound as if there has been some slack drafting as it should have been established if there was a right of way.

                Comment


                  #9
                  As LC says its whether its significant- if the brown coloured ROW is the only way you can get to your flat or parking then its absence would be significant!
                  Based on the information posted, I offer my thoughts.Any action you then take is your liability. While commending individual effort, there is no substitute for a thorough review of documents and facts by paid for professional advisers.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
                    I can only repeat that without seeing the documents it is difficult to comment. It does though sound as if there has been some slack drafting as it should have been established if there was a right of way.
                    Originally posted by Trevor62 View Post
                    I reread the lease covering the colouring of the right of way, it mentions the colour brown as a shared right of way but it also says "if any", now as there is no brown on the plans I take it that there isn't any, yet my lawyer seems to be waiting for a reply on this matter.
                    Looking on the plans everything looks to be in order, I don't know whether I should tell the lawyer to not dwell on this matter.
                    Originally posted by leaseholdanswers View Post
                    As LC says its whether its significant- if the brown coloured ROW is the only way you can get to your flat or parking then its absence would be significant!
                    This is basically what is written:

                    ****** and which as to there positions and boundaries are shown on the plan annexed herato and thereon coloured pink and purple hatched black secondly all that maisonette know as number ** aforesaid being the first floor of the building now standing apon the piece of land shown on the said plan there on coloured purple and hatched black on the said plan together with (1) the right in common with the lessor and the superior lessor and the tenants or occupier of the lower maisonette known as number ** aforsaid and other persons having the like right to pass and re pass on foot only over the part (if any) of the passageway shown an the said plan and thereon coloured brown for the purpose of access to the premises hereby demised and also for the purpose of cleaning or executing repairs or other work to the demised premises the lessee making all good all damage thereby occasioned and contributing from time to time a due proportion of the expense of repair and maintaining the part (if any) of the passageway coloured brown on the said plan.......

                    This is what is written word for word about right of way, there is no brown only green which ends at the foot of my stair case leading to the front door, the stairs then become purple/ hatched black together with the whole of the upper building.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      The drafting is not exactly a model of clarity. It is fair enough when the position is unknown to say something like "the right to drain surface water through the drains (if any) under the Vendor's adjoining land". However, referring to "a right of way over the path coloured brown (if any)" seems very odd because either you are going to put the colouring on the plan or you are not. It is possible that the clause is a result of "one size fits all" drafting and that the wording was applicable to some other property.

                      The question you need to ask your solicitor is whether despite the wording and the lack of any brown colouring on the plan you in fact have all the rights you need.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        I spoke to the agent who sell many properties in this street, he tells me that quite a few of the lease-hold details are similar, like you said I should be asking the solicitor whether I do have the rights I need.

                        I'm getting a bit impatient with the solicitor on this matter, I'm hoping to get more clarity when I get to discuss this matter fully this week.

                        I will post the out-come asap.

                        Cheers

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Unfortunately there is a tendency to put problems to one side when there is something easy which can be attended to. You need to chivvy your lawyer up.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            I got some written answers from solicitor;

                            My question:

                            Covenants unknown on the charges register refer to the freehold so how can this affect the leasehold?
                            Also the date 1865 means to me that documentation was not that efficient in those days, I don't see the need for insurance.

                            Solicitors answer:

                            If the lease-hold title is affected, it will have a knock on effect on the lease-hold title since leases normally refer to observance of the free-hold.

                            The reply to the brown area:

                            Solicitors answer:

                            With regards to the brown colouring- yes it doe's say "if any". My question to you is should there be "any" as far as you are aware in terms of access? The colouring is not great on the plan provided.


                            What do you think?

                            Comment

                            Latest Activity

                            Collapse

                            Working...
                            X