OV9

It's a big day today. Surveryor is attending to attempt entry to the neighbours flat downstairs. He won't be allowed in, because of lots of crazy reasons, including my neighbour attempting to take the case to the high court . In fact, the neighbours emailed yesterday, clearly stating "Be advised that your surveyor will not be permitted entry to [the property]...". That's despite two court orders telling them that they must allow access, as per the lease.

Immediately after that, my solicitor will serve a section 146 notice, after which they have 14 days to remedy the breach (and pay my last expenses) before forfeiture proceedings are issued in the county court.

It's starting to feel like we're finally getting somewhere after four years of battling this nonsense.

Are there mental health issues here (theirs, not yours)? Or are you simply dealing with a pair of stubborn boomers?

Very likely both of those are playing off each other.

When I was on good terms with them prior to 2018, I always urged them to ask for help if they were facing any difficulties, in the same way that I always have done when I've been struggling. I've also done enough personal development work to know that you can't force someone to get help, they need to want it - and they do not want it. My solicitor has constantly urged them to obtain proper legal advice, probably 100+ times in writing, however they feel they know better and have ignored that too.

At the same time, they hold the belief that they are innocent victims who are simply trying to live a quiet life, and that I am an evil landlord whose sole aim is forfeiture, also that the court orders are the manifestation of a failed justice system and ignorant judges, and that if they push this high enough, justice will eventually be done and they'll be left alone.

However, they're somewhat deluded, for example, their last request to "negotiate" requested that all costs to date be dropped and that the freeholder would promise to never take any legal action against the lessees of that flat for any matter whatsoever in the future errrrrrrmmm.

I'm not sure if this was covered earlier but what remedial work needs to be done to the building? Do they have fear of it being a large amount and they can't fund their portion?

I'm clearly trying to read logic into their actions which is probably a grave error but I'm interested now!

GG. wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 9:41 am I'm not sure if this was covered earlier but what remedial work needs to be done to the building? Do they have fear of it being a large amount and they can't fund their portion?

Isn't that the issue ? - Gav's got no idea as he hasn't been able to gain access for several years.

They're most probably hoarders, which means they will go to extreme lengths to ensure nobody sees inside their property. As a consequence there are undoubtedly many internal repairs (i.e. an entire renovation!) which need doing, alongside visible ones (e.g. some of their windows are boarded up) and external repairs such as guttering and soffits, that are joint responsibility between the two leaseholders (myself and them). Very little work has been done externally for the last decade.

It is likely they don't have funds to pay for any works needed, however if they had conceded that fact then we could have found a way to deal with this. They have said in the past that they wanted to move away from the area. If that's true, they could have sold their property, used the proceeds to pay for repairs and bought a little bungalow out in Essex and this would have all been wrapped up in 2020.

Are the internal repairs likely to be cosmetic, or is internal access required for more substantive structural repairs?

dinny_g wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:02 am

GG. wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 9:41 am I'm not sure if this was covered earlier but what remedial work needs to be done to the building? Do they have fear of it being a large amount and they can't fund their portion?

Isn't that the issue ? - Gav's got no idea as he hasn't been able to gain access for several years.

Well yes and no. The way owner occupied long leasehold flats work in practice is you don't generally interfere with what goes on inside other peoples flats - that's really their business unless they're proposing to knock down structural walls, etc. where the joint freeholders would need to provide consent as that will be prohibited under the lease. Its not akin to a landlord and short leasehold tenancy though other leaseholders may look to enforce covenants that impinge on their enjoyment of their property (e.g. they often say the flats must be carpeted to reduce noise (and this is often ignored with the trend for wood floors)).

If there are repairs to the exterior of the building then that's another matter and you would expect the flats to share the cost of maintenance but you'd rarely need a surveyor to gain entry to determine that unless there was some structure issue that just affected part of the property and couldn't be assessed from the outside.

I guess the issue here is that it sounds like ther is a lot of maintenance to be done and to determine the cost contribution for that the surveyor needs to undertake a full review of the building. Normaly Gav would have no ability to do any of this because the freehold would be held jointly and the other freeholder would just veto it and that's the end of that (and the risk you have in going into a share of freehold property with an impecunious neighbour). The difference here is Gav now has the full freehold and can enforce rights against essentially (in a layman view) a co-owner of the building in a way he would not be easily able to do otherwise.

Gavster wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 9:38 am However, they're somewhat deluded, for example, their last request to "negotiate" requested that all costs to date be dropped and that the freeholder would promise to never take any legal action against the lessees of that flat for any matter whatsoever in the future errrrrrrmmm.

Sounds fair enough, what’s your problem?

I think Gavin has undersold quite how bad the place is. Nobody knows for sure of course, but I fully expect it to be structurally unsafe, and a health hazard generally. The place is going to be disgusting. The "repairs" are likely to be a complete strip out to a bare shell and start again.

GG. wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:16 am ...unless they're proposing to knock down structural walls, etc. where the joint freeholders would need to provide consent as that will be prohibited under the lease.

It's entirely possible they've done this long ago, and it's one of the reasons they won't let anyone in.

They are also under a fundamental misunderstanding - despite it being explained repeatedly - that they own the property. They only own the lease. Gavin as Freeholder owns the property. They seem to think they are allowed to do whatever they like to "their" property.

Sundayjumper wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:18 am I think Gavin has undersold quite how bad the place is. Nobody knows for sure of course, but I fully expect it to be structurally unsafe, and a health hazard generally. The place is going to be disgusting. The "repairs" are likely to be a complete strip out to a bare shell and start again.

This is what I expected - interestingly there is a building right at the end of our street that is like this and is a complete eyesore and bordering on structurally unsound. It is above an old printers shop which has been derilect for probably 20 years. Interestingly the shop part is now being sold so it will be interesting to see what happend to it...

Sundayjumper wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:22 am

GG. wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:16 am ...unless they're proposing to knock down structural walls, etc. where the joint freeholders would need to provide consent as that will be prohibited under the lease.

It's entirely possible they've done this long ago, and it's one of the reasons they won't let anyone in.

They are also under a fundamental misunderstanding - despite it being explained repeatedly - that they own the property. They only own the lease. Gavin as Freeholder owns the property. They seem to think they are allowed to do whatever they like to "their" property.

Yes and no. The freehold is essentially a legal fiction (fiction may be strong but I think you know what I mean) to be able to allow a house to be split into compartments and there were proposals to change the law entirely to do away with this given the difficulties it causes (but that came to nothing). It isn't a landlord tenant relationship but more two co-owners of a building with one not agreeing to keep up their share of the upkeep.

Similar practical result but Gav is not the "owner" and they the "leaseholder" in any normal sense of those words to the lay individual and why you should never buy a long leasehold in a building that is not "share of freehold".

I guess this sounds like I'm backing them up which I'm really not - I'm just saying the way these things work is quirky and not at all self explanatory to those not accustomed to old victorian buildings split into flats.

I've previously suggested that the neighbour's first wife & all her belongings are walled up in second bedroom. I'm just putting it out there. For the record.

Gavster wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:04 am They're most probably hoarders, which means they will go to extreme lengths to ensure nobody sees inside their property. As a consequence there are undoubtedly many internal repairs (i.e. an entire renovation!) which need doing, alongside visible ones (e.g. some of their windows are boarded up) and external repairs such as guttering and soffits, that are joint responsibility between the two leaseholders (myself and them). Very little work has been done externally for the last decade.

It is likely they don't have funds to pay for any works needed, however if they had conceded that fact then we could have found a way to deal with this. They have said in the past that they wanted to move away from the area. If that's true, they could have sold their property, used the proceeds to pay for repairs and bought a little bungalow out in Essex and this would have all been wrapped up in 2020.

There are _always_ mental health issues where hoarders are concerned. So yes, that's likely an accelerant in this whole sad affair.

Sundayjumper wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:26 am I've previously suggested that the neighbour's first wife & all her belongings are walled up in second bedroom. I'm just putting it out there. For the record.

Either way I'm making sure that whoever goes in there first is wearing a GoPro

Gavster wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:31 am

Sundayjumper wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:26 am I've previously suggested that the neighbour's first wife & all her belongings are walled up in second bedroom. I'm just putting it out there. For the record.

Either way I'm making sure that whoever goes in there first is wearing a GoPro

I expect it will be like one of those spooky urban explorer videos

Sundayjumper wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:26 am I've previously suggested that the neighbour's first wife & all her belongings are walled up in second bedroom. I'm just putting it out there. For the record.

Update: Surveyor has left, with no access gained...

Gavster wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:31 am

Sundayjumper wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:26 am I've previously suggested that the neighbour's first wife & all her belongings are walled up in second bedroom. I'm just putting it out there. For the record.

Either way I'm making sure that whoever goes in there first is wearing a GoPro