Legal Responsibility For Windows

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

    Legal Responsibility For Windows

    Hi all,

    So after a recent bit of weather damage to one of the windows in my leasehold BTL apartment, the management company kindly pointed me to the attached section of the lease and said that I am fully responsible for the windows.

    Can anyone legally minded tell me if that's true based on the attached picture?

    The issue is that my insurer said they do not usually offer buildings insurance to the leaseholder, as it's generally covered under the freeholder's insurance, which is what I also assumed. However, in this case the freeholder is accepting no liability, and I want to make sure that their position is correct before I explore getting a quote for building's insurance that includes the windows and everything else.

    Thanks.


    #2
    If this picture true, their position is legally correct.

    Comment


      #3
      The extract you quote only shows what is included in the property. We need to see (a) the tenant's repairing covenant and (b) the landlord's insurance covenant.

      Comment


        #4
        Is your problem "broken glass pane" or "broken window frame". ?

        Item 1.1(f) does state that windows and glass are demised to the leaseholder. The cost of window repair belongs to the leaseholder.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Gordon999 View Post
          Is your problem "broken glass pane" or "broken window frame". ?

          Item 1.1(f) does state that windows and glass are demised to the leaseholder. The cost of window repair belongs to the leaseholder.
          Just because the window is demised to the tenant does not mean he has to repair it. We need the information requested in post 3.

          Comment


            #6
            You also need a copy of the buildings insurance to see what you have paid for!

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post

              Just because the window is demised to the tenant does not mean he has to repair it. We need the information requested in post 3.
              Please find attached - Apologies, as it's quite wordy!

              Comment


                #8
                The tenant's repairing covenant contains the words I was hoping to see. The obligation does not extend to repairing damage caused by an insured risk unless the insurers withhold funds because of some act of the tenant. Go back to the management company and point this out.and remind them of the obligation under the heading "Landlord's Insurance Covenant".

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
                  The tenant's repairing covenant contains the words I was hoping to see. The obligation does not extend to repairing damage caused by an insured risk unless the insurers withhold funds because of some act of the tenant. Go back to the management company and point this out.and remind them of the obligation under the heading "Landlord's Insurance Covenant".
                  I understand that the risk is insured based on what you said, but does the picture in post #7 imply that the window itself would be covered under said insured risk?

                  Comment


                    #10
                    The freeholder should be insuring the building against storm damage. This insurance would cover all parts of the building, regardless of whether or not they are demised to a leaseholder, so the windows should be covered for storm damage.

                    The terms you posted in post #7 say that the freeholder is not obliged to insure any additions by leaseholders but, I don't see how that could apply, even if the windows have been replaced previously.

                    Comment

                    Latest Activity

                    Collapse

                    • Reply to Section 61 and my Landlords rights for an order of possesion
                      by andyg1
                      In consideration of the sum of Nine Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds (£9750 ) receipt of which the Lessor herby acknowledges The Lessor with limited title guarantee demised to the Lessee the Premises To Hold the Premises to the Lessee for a term of 172 years from 25th March 1978 Together With...
                      21-01-2022, 12:35 PM
                    • Section 61 and my Landlords rights for an order of possesion
                      by andyg1
                      Hi All

                      I wonder if anyone can set my mind to rest, i am the leaseholder of the flat in question . In 2008 i employed a firm of solicitors to extend my Lease . It was a 99 year lease granted in 1978 and it was eventually extended for an additional 90 years . During negotiations...
                      20-01-2022, 16:35 PM
                    • Reply to Why would managing agent use S20 dispensation?
                      by eagle2
                      The reason should have been explained to you when the application was made and you should have had the opportunity to challenge the application. The Tribunal would have considered if there was any prejudice to the leaseholders and should have made any appropriate comments within its decision.
                      21-01-2022, 06:21 AM
                    • Why would managing agent use S20 dispensation?
                      by Flashback1966
                      Have a flat in a block. The communal area is in very poor condition. Lighting not working for 15 years. Carpets worn out and threadbare. You can see the floorboard in places. Electrical cupboard door falling off.... Some residents leaving furniture in hallway.

                      The managing agents applied...
                      20-01-2022, 20:50 PM
                    • Reply to Are stopcocks responsibility of Lessee or Lessor
                      by nukecad
                      You have a point, most of the cost for a small job like that is the plumbers call out charge, so it makes sense to only have the one call out.

                      If it's just seized up then there are things you can try, it may sound odd but one of them is tightening the top nut and then slackening it again....
                      21-01-2022, 05:59 AM
                    • Are stopcocks responsibility of Lessee or Lessor
                      by NaomiB
                      Our flats were built in 1962. Some of the stopcocks are now seized up. Originally, the water came into the building and there was a stopcock for each flat in the cupboard in the communal area. It may confuse things a bit now because we have water meters for each flat outside. However, I wanted to...
                      17-01-2022, 08:44 AM
                    • Reply to Are stopcocks responsibility of Lessee or Lessor
                      by NaomiB
                      It does make a difference if I have to pay, say, £130 for just my one whereas all nine could be done for not a lot more. I've passed it over to the residents' association to decide whether they want to go ahead or not. I'll spray mine with WD40 tomorrow!...
                      20-01-2022, 23:27 PM
                    • Reply to Are stopcocks responsibility of Lessee or Lessor
                      by Flashback1966
                      Whether it is paid out of service charge or by individual flat owner, it still comes out the same pocket!.

                      However, given that you plan to sell you flat, the last thing you want is an uncontrolled water leak damaging your flat.

                      it is better to get a job done at once. ...
                      20-01-2022, 21:05 PM
                    • Reply to Isn't there any obligation to be insured?
                      by Flashback1966
                      If there is a leak from the flat above, then you need to claim on your insurance. I know it sounds unfair, but that is how it works. The upper flat is responsible for fixing the leak. Ideally the entire building should be under one insurance policy, but sometimes, people insure separately....
                      20-01-2022, 20:33 PM
                    • Isn't there any obligation to be insured?
                      by Sarah17
                      Hi All,
                      I recently bought a flat and learned since that the flat above is a regulated tenancy. The current tenant has moved in 1972. The flat is in a very shabby state, and I am worried about it (safety concerns, fire risk...etc). I wrote to the landlord and didn't receive any answer yet. A few...
                      16-01-2022, 17:57 PM
                    Working...
                    X