Hello
I own a flat in a block of six. A social landlord owns the block and two of the flats. Two of the leaseholders (one of which is me) replaced the flat windows in 2014: old single glazed (but functional) for new double glazed.
The landlord recently sent a section 20 stating windows would be changed as there "appears to be a maintenance issue". They didn't inspect the block before hand as they were surprised when two leaseholders pointed out that they'd fitted new windwos, and provided FENSA documentation/etc.
The landlord accepts the new windows do not need replacing but insists the leaseholders must pay 1/6 of the cost to replace the windows in the other four flats. To be clear, the landlord is not offering to repay the cost of the windows replaced by the two leaseholders, add to the scheme cost and divide the entire scheme by six.
Ownership of the windows is unclear. The landlord owns the major structural elements of the building (a window is not structural - the building stays up if they are removed) and does not own the glass of the windows. So a reasonable interpretation would have to be made.
I can see their logic. The lease makes no room for improvements and the lease states all maintenance must be paid for by all leaseholders. But there was never any maintenance issue and the primary driver for replacement is because they wish to improve the building. They wish to improve the building so must argue maintenance and hence can't ask four leaseholders to pay 1/4 of the charge.
In this situation, is it reasonable for the landlord to recharge all leaseholders 1/6 of the cost of replacing 4 out of 6 leaseholder windows? Note there are no communal areas that require windows.
Is there any case-law/FTT cases that cover such a scenario?
mkll
I own a flat in a block of six. A social landlord owns the block and two of the flats. Two of the leaseholders (one of which is me) replaced the flat windows in 2014: old single glazed (but functional) for new double glazed.
The landlord recently sent a section 20 stating windows would be changed as there "appears to be a maintenance issue". They didn't inspect the block before hand as they were surprised when two leaseholders pointed out that they'd fitted new windwos, and provided FENSA documentation/etc.
The landlord accepts the new windows do not need replacing but insists the leaseholders must pay 1/6 of the cost to replace the windows in the other four flats. To be clear, the landlord is not offering to repay the cost of the windows replaced by the two leaseholders, add to the scheme cost and divide the entire scheme by six.
Ownership of the windows is unclear. The landlord owns the major structural elements of the building (a window is not structural - the building stays up if they are removed) and does not own the glass of the windows. So a reasonable interpretation would have to be made.
I can see their logic. The lease makes no room for improvements and the lease states all maintenance must be paid for by all leaseholders. But there was never any maintenance issue and the primary driver for replacement is because they wish to improve the building. They wish to improve the building so must argue maintenance and hence can't ask four leaseholders to pay 1/4 of the charge.
In this situation, is it reasonable for the landlord to recharge all leaseholders 1/6 of the cost of replacing 4 out of 6 leaseholder windows? Note there are no communal areas that require windows.
Is there any case-law/FTT cases that cover such a scenario?
mkll
Comment