Demise of flat roof

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

    Demise of flat roof

    Hi, looking for some advice. Sorry for long story below.
    I own a two bedroom first floor flat, the second bedroom is in the converted loft. It looks out over a flat roof, which only i can access via a door off the staircase up to the attic. I very rarely access it, but sometimes will pop out for a drink after work if the weather is nice.
    I am a co freeholder with the owner of the ground floor flat.
    The demise of the flat room is owned equally by both freeholders and we are both responsible for the upkeep. There is nothing in the lease about my flat having access to the flat roof. It’s just been an unwritten understanding between me and my co freeholder.
    I am trying to sell my flat. I had an interested party who wanted to buy the demise of the flat roof off the co freeholder to potentially develop it at a later date.
    the co freeholder asked for an extortionate amount of money and it meant the sale fell through.
    I then had a second buyer who asked for the lease to be amended to include a line about having “access” to the flat roof. Basically firming up the current situation.
    Again the co freeholder said no and another sale collapsed.
    I feel like I have no power here and because of my co freeholder I may never be able to sell my flat!
    Any one have any advice or been in a similar situation?
    Obviously if he sold the demise of the flat roof the new owner would take on the cost of upkeep- but he has asked for a ridiculous amount of money- I just can’t see a way of resolving this!

    #2
    Tricky one , seems greedy but don't forget he jointly owns all that airspace and development potential and presumably pays 50% of roof maintenance
    Realistically you will have to give him some money but I would think maybe £5000 (assuming it's not in Mayfair !) to include the space in your demise.
    Alternatively just ignore it. If you've been using the space for many years then you will have acquired a right to keep using it so just explain the situation to buyers.

    Comment


      #3
      A way of resolving the question may be to show that the flat roof is already in your demise despite not being expressly included. It comes down to what is in the lease and layout. Please read this thread: https://forums.landlordzone.co.uk/fo...-in-the-lease=

      Comment


        #4
        Thanks both very helpful. He has asked for 40k for the demise of the flat roof and approval rights for any future plans!
        Obviously we can’t/ won’t pay that as it feels like he is just profiteering off us. Plus if he sells it surely he can’t then ask for control on future developments?
        So I just wondered what happens next? If a figure can’t be agreed on, are we stuck and completely at the will of the co freeholder.
        Unfortunately both our lost buyers were not happy with our current situation that we have access in theory and reality but just not on paper, despite that working perfectly well for us for the last 15years!

        Comment


          #5
          .About Getting a roof terrace demised to my flat
          Hi, I know this is an old thread but I was searching the forum and this thread and was hoping I could ask you some questions as your previous answers was very useful.
          I own a two bedroom first floor flat, the second bedroom is in the converted loft. It looks out over a flat roof, which only i can access via a door off the staircase up to the attic. I very rarely access it, but sometimes will pop out for a drink after work if the weather is nice.
          I am a co freeholder with the owner of the ground floor flat.
          The demise of the flat room is owned equally by both freeholders and we are both responsible for the upkeep. There is nothing in the lease about my flat having access to the flat roof. It’s just been an unwritten understanding between me and my co freeholder.
          I am trying to sell my flat. I had an interested party who wanted to buy the demise of the flat roof off the co freeholder to potentially develop it at a later date.
          The co freeholder asked for an extortionate amount of money (£40k) and it meant the sale fell through.
          I then had a second buyer who asked for the lease to be amended to include a line about having “access” to the flat roof. Basically firming up the current situation.
          Again the co freeholder said no and another sale collapsed.
          I feel like I have no power here and because of my co freeholder I may never be able to sell my flat.
          I don't really know where to go next? What if we cant find a price we can agree on? He says the 40k was calculated from the value he thinks it will add to my flat - it wont be anywhere near that. Are we just stuck at check mate and I have to live here forever?
          Also, the potential buyers all want to formalise the arrangement - is there any benefit for leaving it as it is? They seem worried that if my co freeholder changes, the new one might no longer allow them access?
          Its all a bit of a mess so any advice gratefully received.
          Thank you

          Comment


            #6
            How much is your flat worth ?

            Comment


              #7
              Flat is being marketing at £750,000

              Comment


                #8
                He is also saying that as well as the 40k for the demise of the flat roof he wants approval rights for any future plans
                Surely once he has sold it, he cant then have a say on what we do with it?

                Comment


                  #9
                  Just spotted your posts in the other thread. Perhaps a moderator can move them to this thread.

                  If (a) you have exclusive access to the flat roof via a door which was there when the lease was granted and (b) there is nothing in the lease which indicates a right to exclude the flat roof, then, so long as there is no devil in the detail, you have a sporting chance of arguing that the flat roof is included by the operation of section 62(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925. Run the idea past your conveyancer. The fact that responsibility for the flat roof is joint is not an indication of an intention to exclude it.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    It seems to me that you have two options:
                    1. Pay whatever the other freeholder wants you to pay in order to agree to alter the leases (noting that if they are including a premium for increase in the value of your flat, half of that premium is your - if you have equal shares of the freehold). You will also have to agree to any conditions that they want included.
                    Both price and conditions are naturally subject to negotiation, but there is no obligation for them to agree to anything.
                    2. Make it clear to any potential buyers that the lease that they are buying gives them no right of access to the roof, despite there being access via a door from your flat, and they are therefore buying a flat without a roof terrace, and you should make sure that it is not advertised as having a roof terrace. If this means that all potential buyers reduce the amount that they are willing to offer, and you have to drop the asking price, you will know how much value access to a roof terrace adds.

                    There is a possibility that the fact that there is access only from your flat effectively gives some rights to use the roof, but you would need your solicitor to look into that and it still might not satisfy potential buyers.


                    Originally posted by SwLondon80 View Post
                    He is also saying that as well as the 40k for the demise of the flat roof he wants approval rights for any future plans
                    Surely once he has sold it, he cant then have a say on what we do with it?
                    It seems perfectly reasonable for the other co-freeholder to want approval rights for any future development included in any agreement to demise the roof space. Allowing use as a roof terrace is one thing, potentially having an extension built is something very different.
                    It may be an unnecessary requirement, because they would have a say over most types of development anyway, and could agree to the roof being demised but with a stipulation included that it is demised only for use as a roof terrace and no further development is allowed.

                    If I was the other co-freeholder I would probably insist on the same type of conditions as they are asking, that it was demised only for use as a roof terrace, and also that your lease took on a higher percentage of the cost of any future repairs needed to the roof (perhaps all costs).

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Are you advertising the flat as having a roof terrace?

                      And yes, if I was selling it then I would want a say in any future development to make sure it's not going to come crashing down on my head.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by nukecad View Post
                        Are you advertising the flat as having a roof terrace?

                        And yes, if I was selling it then I would want a say in any future development to make sure it's not going to come crashing down on my head.
                        It has to depend on the proposed use. If paying 50,000 pounds you cannot let the other tenant have a complete veto. In fact if you want to develop the best policy has to be to get the other tenant to approve the proposal before he gets any cash. If paying 5,000 pounds it is reasonable to impose a restriction requiring the area to be used as roof garden only.

                        Anyway, see if section 62 rides to the rescue before thinking about paying anything.

                        Comment

                        Latest Activity

                        Collapse

                        • Reply to Legal Action Against Landlord - Local Council
                          by Section20z
                          It may benefit older leases by removing "marriage value" from lease extensions but this would not help you _ and freeholders are also aware of imminent changes and may be more willing to negotiate prior.
                          Speak with a specialist like Homehold.org who will negotiate on your behalf,...
                          05-12-2021, 07:14 AM
                        • Legal Action Against Landlord - Local Council
                          by Isaac1400
                          Hi,

                          Hoping someone can advise. I am leaseholder and the landlord is a local council. my property is a flat and there are about 55 flats spread out over 3 floors.

                          Now the problem is that over the years the council has failed to maintain the exterior and communal areas - including...
                          02-12-2021, 07:13 AM
                        • How much can the freeholder charge for registering details of a sublet?
                          by Joubert
                          I am a director of a Freehold Company of a small block of 28 flats in a popular residential area.

                          Over the past few years the majority of flats have been purchased by investors who sublet the flats on ASTs.

                          Although the leases between the Freehold Company and the lessees are...
                          04-12-2021, 17:35 PM
                        • Reply to How much can the freeholder charge for registering details of a sublet?
                          by eagle2
                          If the lease states that you may charge a registration fee of £10, that is the amount you may charge, you are not entitled to increase the charge unless the lease specifically allows an increase. Even then you would be limited to a reasonable amount and £100 would be considered to be unreasonable....
                          05-12-2021, 06:55 AM
                        • Reply to Legal Action Against Landlord - Local Council
                          by andydd
                          I sued my freeholder for failure to maintain my driveway, judge was quite damning but I was only awarded £100 as hard to proof any loss BUT in your case it sounds you have exceptional worry over various incidents so yes you could sue and as I found out it was useful, I got costs too and its something...
                          04-12-2021, 21:19 PM
                        • Dilapidated Flat
                          by scot22
                          In a block of 24, unfortunately one flat has become dilapidated. The new owner has bought cheaply. She is now demanding the Freeholder pays to refurbish it claiming they have been negligent. Is there a reasonable case ?
                          04-12-2021, 11:21 AM
                        • Reply to Dilapidated Flat
                          by scot22
                          Thanks all. It was a great price, significantly below market value, plus in further negotiations a reduction to pay for any further work. This was identified by a surveyor. She is not clueless.....
                          Artful in my research I read that can only claim for her ownership period.
                          It is all i...
                          04-12-2021, 19:33 PM
                        • Reply to Legal Action Against Landlord - Local Council
                          by Isaac1400
                          Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I have heard of this. In summary do you know if this would benefit those with older leases and not on the builds which have has issues with rising ground rent etc?...
                          04-12-2021, 19:09 PM
                        • Reply to Dilapidated Flat
                          by Macromia
                          If a leaseholder can show that internal maintenance is required because of a freeholder's negligence (e.g. a failure to meet external maintenance obligations according to the terms of the lease), they will potentially have a claim against the freeholder and be entitled to expect the freeholder (the...
                          04-12-2021, 16:59 PM
                        • Reply to Dilapidated Flat
                          by theartfullodger
                          The previous owner might have had a case. The new owner I think only for claims for problems during their ownership. But ianal.

                          Presumably she got a great price as it was so dilapidated
                          04-12-2021, 16:51 PM
                        Working...
                        X