OV9

You see, I can see partially one side of this being them being ashamed of the state of the place, etc - but ultimately, a cleaner only costs so much, and so does self storage. And it certainly doesn't cost you the entire fucking house.

They do sound like boomer arseholes though, so fuck 'em.

Yeah, it's two maisonettes in the whole building, the old couple are the "neighbours" in the ground floor maisonette. I'm the owner occupier leasholder and also freeholder in the upper maisonette.

It does essentially show that the legal system only works for those whose pockets are deep enough to pay for it. If I didn't have access to finance for this, then I would have struggled to deal with the issue.

Beany wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 1:41 pm You see, I can see partially one side of this being them being ashamed of the state of the place, etc - but ultimately, a cleaner only costs so much, and so does self storage. And it certainly doesn't cost you the entire fucking house.

They do sound like boomer arseholes though, so fuck 'em.

I get that, and if they'd had the humility to simply say "we've got a problem and we don't know how to deal with it" then we could have resolved all of this years ago. Instead, they deny there is any issue, and do things like file a 60-page acquisition order which is basically a (misguided and unwawrranted) attempt to remove the freehold from me instead.

Basically, the deeper this issue goes, the more they come out fighting.

That all sounds horribly stressful. People are weird. They'll be Freemans of the Land or something next, no doubt. Good luck, 40k is a fuck load of money to fight stupidity (and also sounds horribly familiar).

Sounds like a nightmare and exactly the reason I'm terrified of freehold flats or where the freehold is owned by the leaseholders!

If the works need doing and you end up paying for it all can you put a charge on their property?

Carlos wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 3:01 pm If the works need doing and you end up paying for it all can you put a charge on their property?

In theory yes, but in practice it may be quicker and easier to go for forfeiture of their lease and a possession order.

To be honest @Carlos I've been in share of freehold buildings before that have been an absolute pleasure. These guys are particularly difficult.

Exactly as Jobbo said. Also IIRC because there's a suggestion (i.e. dilapidation) that they might not have sufficient funds to deal with renovation costs anyway.

All these letters they’ve sent- how many times have they tried to reference the Magna Carta?

Don’t! He’ll probably try that for his next trick. His primary defence so far has been to tell judges that the case is in the wrong court. He loves to question the basis of the claim.

Gavster wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 5:33 pm Don’t! He’ll probably try that for his next trick. His primary defence so far has been to tell judges that the case is in the wrong court. He loves to question the basis of the claim.

Carlos wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 3:01 pm the freehold is owned by the leaseholders!

How does that work? I you own the freehold on a property, then why the lease?

That sounds like an utter pain to have to deal with.

dinny_g wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 5:39 pm

Carlos wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 3:01 pm the freehold is owned by the leaseholders!

How does that work? I you own the freehold on a property, then why the lease?

Good question, however I know from experience that owning a freehold flat, while there are other leasehold flats in the same building, causes all kinds of problems for mortgage lenders.

If it’s multiple flats that all want an interest in the freehold, then the leases are necessary so that you are the only one who owns your flat. Then you can all share the freehold. Without the leases you’d each own part of each other’s flats and therefore have rights to access/use them too

dinny_g wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 5:39 pm

Carlos wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 3:01 pm the freehold is owned by the leaseholders!

How does that work? I you own the freehold on a property, then why the lease?

Think he’s talking about shared freehold where the leaseholders of the flats collectively own the freehold of the building.

jamcg wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 5:38 pm

Gavster wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 5:33 pm Don’t! He’ll probably try that for his next trick. His primary defence so far has been to tell judges that the case is in the wrong court. He loves to question the basis of the claim.

Surprisingly accurate

Jobbo wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 3:10 pm

Carlos wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 3:01 pm If the works need doing and you end up paying for it all can you put a charge on their property?

In theory yes, but in practice it may be quicker and easier to go for forfeiture of their lease and a possession order.

This may be a stupid question for a lawyer, even of a different stripe (and likely justifies my old Oxford tutor's observation that "you seem to struggle with any examination with a property aspect...") but on forefeiture is the lessee who loses his interest entitled to compensation for the loss of residual value of the reversionary interest (probably not the correct term...)?

I haven't read the above carefully enough to determine if the intransigent neighbours are owners of a long leasehold (i.e. effectively a half million quid asset), or short - but assuming the former and the lease reverts to the freeholder without compensation for market value then our Gav might be in for a huge windfall...

Seems like an inequitable (from a legal, rather than moral, in this case!) result to me, hence the question.

240PP wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 6:58 pm

dinny_g wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 5:39 pm

Carlos wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 3:01 pm the freehold is owned by the leaseholders!

How does that work? I you own the freehold on a property, then why the lease?

Think he’s talking about shared freehold where the leaseholders of the flats collectively own the freehold of the building.

Nah It’s more who owns the freehold on the ground floor flat? Gav’s original explanation suggests he’s the freeholder and owner/occupier of the first floor flat but does he also hold the freehold on the ground floor??

dinny_g wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 9:22 pm

240PP wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 6:58 pm

dinny_g wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 5:39 pm

How does that work? I you own the freehold on a property, then why the lease?

Think he’s talking about shared freehold where the leaseholders of the flats collectively own the freehold of the building.

Nah It’s more who owns the freehold on the ground floor flat? Gav’s original explanation suggests he’s the freeholder and owner/occupier of the first floor flat but does he also hold the freehold on the ground floor??

In Gav’s situation, yes. I thought you were querying what Carlos was talking about.

dinny_g wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 9:22 pm

240PP wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 6:58 pm

dinny_g wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 5:39 pm

How does that work? I you own the freehold on a property, then why the lease?

Think he’s talking about shared freehold where the leaseholders of the flats collectively own the freehold of the building.

Nah It’s more who owns the freehold on the ground floor flat? Gav’s original explanation suggests he’s the freeholder and owner/occupier of the first floor flat but does he also hold the freehold on the ground floor??

The freehold is of the whole building and each floor is occupied subject to its own lease. The freehold itself typically has nominal value only until the subservient leases are under 84 years old at which point the freeholder can levy a charge for extending to 100+ years based on a specific formula on how much value it adds to the, now short term, lease. If the leases are 999 years it has little value but many in london were only granted for 125 year initial terms and are "coming into the money" so to speak, assuming an ignorant leaseholder doesn't compel an extension for little to no cost when it remains above 84 years.

The other key non-monetary benefit of the freehold is that it is the recipient of the negative covenants in the leases - i.e. the "though shalt not knock down internal load bearing walls" stuff. If they fail to honour those covenants the freeholder can take action, including up to forfeiture (e.g. taking back) the lease.

Basically, buying the freehold was a smart thing to do. Normally each of the subservient leases hold a part of the freehold, hence "share of freehold" included in property ads as a selling point but in this case Gav has the whole I believe.

Explained better than I could!

And yes, afaik, if the neighbours are stubborn/stupid/deluded enough to allow this to go to forfeiture and possession, then I will receive none of the costs orders, however will take possession of a dilapidated two bedroom flat on a 999 year lease.