Section 20 notice or not

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

    Section 20 notice or not

    A leaseholder asked about getting insulation in the property for himself and we (MC) have taken over the project. We have advised all the LH that we were arranging this and that they would need to sign a proxy form so the management could sign the Green Deal papers to allow the work to be done free of charge. - No Section 20 so far

    The original LH has refused to sign the proxy as he wants to decide who will put insulation in his walls and has advised that he will not allow the company to do the work on 'his' property - he is the only LH & Shareholder who has refused.

    Can we proceed anyway and issue him with a S.20 notice as the work would cost about £500 unless he takes the free deal. His daughter has confirmed they dont want the work on the building to begin without them being included but does not want to incur any costs.

    He and his daughter are joint shareholders and Lease Holders for the property that she lives in.

    #2
    What does the lease say about such works ?. Generally speaking LHmay be responsible for interiour and FH the exterior, where does insulation fall ?
    Advice given is based on my experience representing myself as a leaseholder both in the County Court and at Leasehold Valuation Tribunals.

    I do not accept any liability to you in relation to the advice given.

    It is always recommended you seek further advice from a solicitor or legal expert.

    Always read your lease first, it is the legally binding contract between leaseholder and freeholder.

    Comment


      #3
      There is no mention of who is responcible for what but it does say that internal painting must be done every 7 years and external every 3 years by the LH. If they dont then the FH may appoint workmen and undertake the task and charge the LH.

      The LH sought permission to do the work from us the FH and we asked for info which was not forthcomming. Also you cant do just one flat as those above & below must also be done. like vertical stacking.

      LH wants to do it and feels that his project for his property has been hi-jacked and now all flats are benefiting. I think this is why he is being a pain and not signing any papers that will give him the work free.

      Comment


        #4
        HHmm..

        But surely the FH isnt obliged to do the works and therefore cant just go ahead and bill him, ordinarily if it was something exterior then the FH could go ahead and do the works and perhalps have diffuculty trying to recoup the cost.

        I wonder who the insulation is demised to, and even if it is the FH, I assume the FH would need the LH's co-operation.

        Andy
        Advice given is based on my experience representing myself as a leaseholder both in the County Court and at Leasehold Valuation Tribunals.

        I do not accept any liability to you in relation to the advice given.

        It is always recommended you seek further advice from a solicitor or legal expert.

        Always read your lease first, it is the legally binding contract between leaseholder and freeholder.

        Comment


          #5
          You have to look at their lease and the demise ie what is theirs, and if the area to be insulted is their or yours. if it is cavity wall or roof area in many cases the lessees ownership stops at the plaster.

          While you can proceed it is not his,it depnds on if the grant is still avialable if it is a company name. We have had mixed access with roof insulation in that some have said ok, and some have asked for all residents to sign up. Some accept that is a company, not for profit, wholly owned by the residents like a club and they sometimes fall for it.

          If the grant is being given to your Man Co, and it is not his property to insulate or repair- stuff him!

          there is always one.
          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


            #6
            Thanks guys,

            he says he wants it and he wanted to do it for just his flat, we asked to see papers and he refused. He is a builder by trade - not that i am infering in any way that there was any connection with him doing the work and claiming a grant for his work on his own flat.

            Now we have said the company will organise it for all flats and he (and his contractor) are not doing the work i think he is just trying to be a pain.

            i have his confirmation that they dont want the work to go ahead without them being ncluded and they dont want to pay. Does this therefore equate to him accepting the work on his flat and he will sign the required papers ??? he cant get the former if he wont do the latter but isnt actually saying so as it would look like he has backed down from his normal 'I always get what I want so dont argue' stance.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by billericayboy View Post
              Thanks guys,

              he says he wants it and he wanted to do it for just his flat, we asked to see papers and he refused. He is a builder by trade - not that i am infering in any way that there was any connection with him doing the work and claiming a grant for his work on his own flat.

              Now we have said the company will organise it for all flats and he (and his contractor) are not doing the work i think he is just trying to be a pain.

              i have his confirmation that they dont want the work to go ahead without them being ncluded and they dont want to pay. Does this therefore equate to him accepting the work on his flat and he will sign the required papers ??? he cant get the former if he wont do the latter but isnt actually saying so as it would look like he has backed down from his normal 'I always get what I want so dont argue' stance.
              Thats all very well but we still dont know what the lease says, whose responsibilty is it ?. Perhaps there are some previous LVT decisions that discuss insulation.

              Andy
              Advice given is based on my experience representing myself as a leaseholder both in the County Court and at Leasehold Valuation Tribunals.

              I do not accept any liability to you in relation to the advice given.

              It is always recommended you seek further advice from a solicitor or legal expert.

              Always read your lease first, it is the legally binding contract between leaseholder and freeholder.

              Comment


                #8
                Exactly Andy, it turns on what is his flat.

                if it is loft space which is not demised to him then he could not do the work in the first place.

                if it is something your ManCO can do AND recover it's fair and reasonable costs under the lease, and have consulted ( required even if it is grant aided work) then he can lump it.

                Even if he refuses to pay then depending on the above you may have to press on and get a determination from the LVT and sue him.

                If it is his/his area to maintain then you can proceed with the rest, bear in mind that these costs are no longer service charge costs but an agreement between the man co and each participant ( excepting say a communal area that is included in the work).

                So a row of houses or flats where the outside walls are each leaseholds to maintain and therefore insulate would be individual agreements, but insulating the common roof could be service charge, if recoverable under the lease. Or if its both then it would be a mix.
                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


                  #9
                  THis is the bit of the lease that mentions what is inclused in the lower & upper maisonette :-

                  3. IT IS HEREBY AGREED AND DECLARED as follows :-
                  A. (i) That there shall be included in the lower maisonette one half part in depth of
                  the joists between the ceilings of the lower maisonette and the floor of the upper
                  maisonette and save as hereinafter mentioned the internal and external walls of
                  the lower maisonette up to the same level and there shall be included in the
                  upper maisonette the internal and external walls and the floor above that level
                  together with the roof Notwithstanding the foregoing the water storage tank
                  situated under the said roof and the pipes to and therefrom serving the said
                  lower maisonette shall be included in the lower maisonette
                  (ii) That the entrance passage and staircase leading to the upper maisonette shall
                  be included therein and in so far as such entrance passage and staircase abuts on
                  to a wall or walls forming part of the lower maisonette such wall or walls shall
                  be deemed to be party walls
                  (iii) That of the cupboards and dustbin recesses forming part of the lower
                  maisonette the cupboard and dustbin recess in the immediate proximity of the
                  entrance passage and staircase leading to the upper maisonette shall be included
                  therein and in so far as such cupboard and dustbin recess abuts on to a wall or
                  walls forming part of the lower maisonettes such wall or walls shall be deemed
                  to be party walls
                  (iv) That any wall or walls dividing the lower or upper maisonette from the
                  adjoining maisonette shall be deemed to be party walls
                  B. (i) Such of the walls and fences as are marked with a letter “T’ within the
                  Lessee’s garden on the Estate Plan are included in the Lessee’s Premises
                  (ii) The walls and fences separating the Lessee's Garden from the garden or
                  gardens of the adjoining or other maisonettes on the Estate shall be party walls
                  and fences and shall be maintained by the Lessees concerned as such.

                  Does this mean than the internal and external walls are his, elsewhere there is mention of painting external surfaces every 3 years.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Yes either wall is the lessees and the upper flat has the roof and void to.



                    Any insulting work to those walls and the roof must be with the agreement of the leaseholder.

                    Should he wish to exclude himself than you have no ability to compel him and leave it to him and his co leaseholder to resolve. Do the rest and ensure that the insulation is laid over thermal bridges eg over the party wall between flats and boarded of plastic sheeted and construction taped in place( if the roof is openplan), any gaps in the continuous soffit and fascia etc.

                    And dont forget to ensure that if it is the roof that eaves and soffit/fascias vents are kept open, and with walls that weep holes are not blocked up. Contractors typically exclude that work in roof spaces so be prepared.

                    http://www.roofconsult.co.uk/articles/tiling/tips28.htm
                    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


                      #11
                      Thanks,

                      i will send him another (3rd) set of papers to sign and advise him that if they are not completed in 7 days then we will cancel the work on his property and by default the property above him.

                      this would then i suppose allow the upper property to sue him for their insulation costs in the future as he stopped them from taking benefit of the free offer which he blocked.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Why would you exclude the property above assuming that they are in agreement.
                        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

                        Latest Activity

                        Collapse

                        Working...
                        X