Owning your own home

I assume that's what it is, although some of it might just be textured paint.

2 Attachments

Hard to tell from a picture but could well be.

Artex has a very small amount of azzy in it (around 1-2%). There are DIY products to remove it or cover it over (extra thick paint). Removal is considered pretty safe as the way it's removed keeps the fibres encapsulated. Having said that when I come across it at work I tend to call in specialists so can totally understand if you would prefer to do so.

Our textured paint had asbestos in too.

You can just get a plasterer to skim over it if it's just a smooth finish you want.

Well I did plan on replacing the coving and also rerouting the plumbing through the ceiling as the moment it's badly routed down/ through walls.

Planning to move out while renovation happens so fibres shouldn't be too much of an issue.

We own a flat in a converted London terrace house with a share of the freehold. There are 2 other flats who also have a share (we have 50%). We have been having a problem getting any maintenance done on the building because one of the other owners keeps coming up with delaying and blocking tactics. I think it's just because he is skint.

There's a piece of work that we had all agreed to do but now it is time to start he has started delaying. Ourselves and the other normal flat are fed up and have decided to just go ahead and do the work ourselves and the other normal flat sent an agro email to that effect at the weekend.

It's all kicking off over email now and, amongst other nonsense, the delayer is threatening us with a tribunal for not maintaining the building (extreme lack of self awareness!). My question is - what sort of tribunal could he actually take us to? I thought tribunals were only for leasehold.

If you have a share of freehold then you'll all also have leases with the freehold for your individual flats. I'm not much help beyond that though.

Found a bit more detail on the people who offered on my flat. The chain (including my flat and the one I want to buy) has seven different parties in it.

I'm not feeling too confident about this I must say.

yes, I think that's right. we have a deed of co-ownership which I am now reading for the first time in many years.

it says we can appoint a solicitor for mediation and, if that doesn't work, any of us can go to court "for a decision pursuant to section 14 of the trusts of land and appointment of trustees act 1996".

presumably that court is something very expensive that I'd want to avoid? does it have power to make decisions on any matter? could it appoint a management company if one or more of the owners wanted it?

presumably that court is something very expensive that I'd want to avoid?

Catastrophically. The legal costs would almost certainly be more than the cost of the work if you get lawyers involved. I'm involved in a similar case at the moment - I act for the owners of the upstairs flat who want to make sure the building doesn't fall down, the owners of the empty downstairs flat don't seem to be that bothered. The solicitors instructing me have given the clients a cost estimate of £30-50k if it goes to trial. I think they might be a bit light on that estimate.

does it have power to make decisions on any matter?

Section 14(2)(a) says the court can make any order ' relating to the exercise by the trustees of any of their functions ... as the court thinks fit.' Since you own the freehold jointly the freehold is, by definition, held on trust. All jointly owned land in England and Wales is held by the owners on trust for themselves. So the court has a pretty wide jurisdiction, but it has to have regard to the factors set out in section 15 of the 1996 Act.

could it appoint a management company if one or more of the owners wanted it?

The court couldn't, no. The First Tier Tribunal can appoint a manger to manage a building under Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987, but the manager would have to be paid for and you'd need to establish that one of the threshold grounds in section 24(2) are made out.

The easiest way to resolve it legally would probably be to invoke the Right to Manage under Chapter 1 of Part II of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. You'd have to set up an RTM company, and you'd have to invite the annoying co-owner to participate, but you and the other 'normal' leaseholder would be able to outvote the third one, so between the two of you you'd be in control of management. The trouble with this route is that the resident landlord exemption in paragraph 3 of Schedule 6 of the 2002 Act might well apply, in which case the RTM provisions of the 2002 Act wouldn't apply to your property.

No easy answer, I'm afraid.

thanks very much for such a thorough reply!

the position that we are in is that we and one other flat are willing to pay for the work (external decoration) and it is the other owner who is threatening legal action.

if we went ahead with the work, would he have any comeback on us? the deed says that we are "required to decorate the exterior of the building in such a manner as shall be agreed by the majority...". do I understand this correctly that the 3rd owner (25%) doesn't need to agree to the work? his windows are in poor state so we have said we'd skip his frames if he didn't contribute so as not to be responsible for the condition (all the brickwork will be painted). Frankly we would paint his frames for the sake of an easy life.

the costs you mention are quite chilling! the decoration costs are much less than that. if he did take us to court, would we pay fees as individuals or would the freeholder have to pay (meaning we'd pay 50%)? is there any likelihood that he could have costs awarded so that we'd have to cover his share?

sorry I've come back with so many questions. I really appreciate your help so far.

if we went ahead with the work, would he have any comeback on us? the deed says that we are "required to decorate the exterior of the building in such a manner as shall be agreed by the majority...". do I understand this correctly that the 3rd owner (25%) doesn't need to agree to the work?

Interesting. Usually trustees have to make decisions unanimously, but given that wording it would appear that you can make decisions about exterior decorating by majority. It's not clear whether that's a majority by share of ownership (50/25/25) of simply per flat, but either way, you've got a majority combined with the other nice flat owner. Sounds like his objections can be overruled.

if he did take us to court, would we pay fees as individuals or would the freeholder have to pay (meaning we'd pay 50%)?

Generally costs orders made against multiple parties are joint and several, so you're both/all liable for all of it, and it's up to you how to divvy it up. As for how you'd fund your own legal costs, that would depend on the wording of the leases (whether legal costs are recoverable as service charges) and the declaration of trust.

is there any likelihood that he could have costs awarded so that we'd have to cover his share?

Seems staggeringly unlikely, frankly. You're doing something you're entitled to do, and redecorating the outside of the house in which he lives for free. If he took that to court, I expect he'd end up with a very angry judge and an order for costs against him, not you.

Thanks so much for your patience in helping me understand this. Our lack of understanding is causing a bit of stress.

Your reply is very reassuring although I'm slightly concerned now that by only giving you a snippet of that clause, I might have changed its meaning. Could I have one final question please and ask you to read the whole paragraph and confirm that my understanding is still correct:
So often as reasonably required to decorate the exterior of the Building in such a manner as shall be agreed by the majority of the tenants of the flats or failing agreement in the manner in which they were previously decorated or as near thereto as circumstances permit and in particular (but without prejudice to the generality of this covenant) will paint the exterior parts of the Building usually painted with two coats at least of good quality paint at least once in every four years.

Btw, it's a south facing wall that hasn't been painted for almost 20 years.

Thanks again for your help!

Edit: I think that's the only place in the deed that it mentions a majority.

I read that as the number of people rather than flats.

So if he's got four people on the lease living in his flat (unlikely), and you've got two and your other neighbour has one, then he's got the majority?

IANAL

Has anyone been able to borrow 5x salary in the last few weeks with 80-85% LTV?

IANAL either but I think tenant in this case just means flat and is used to mean the different parties that make up the share of freehold (the landlord) rather than like a rental tenant.

We have 2 kids and the difficult other owner lives alone so we would have a majority that way anyway.

A friend was waiting to hear back about their mortgage at 4.5x salary - ive sent them a text to ask how its going

@Tenderloin I've looked with 3x brokers and a 2 big banks directly (who I have my debit and credit card with) and max I can borrow is 4.5x, even if putting down 25% deposit. Surely this must mean house prices will fall.
I need to wait for the adjustment to happen really but I am a FTB, saved hard for my deposit and I've found an ideal house.

Edit - on your friend - HSBC offered me 4.5x with 90% LTV about 2 weeks ago so I'm sure they will be fine.

ah ok - so you specifically need 5x? Have you tried a low offer?

https://www.wfp.com/listing-showcase/property-details.asp?mlsid=MDMC678718#

Basement's strange.

Nothing unusual could happen there

It's like a personal Kidzania.

Much Saville.

who?

1 Attachment

Brad? Chad? Chuck?

@Tenderloin yeah because they're using a multiple of my temporarily 10% deferred salary (which I can prove is temporary), depsite the fact I'm spending £0 on living other than supermarket. Also just stupid putting down 25% when the interest rate quoted was 1.8% (which is pretty much inflation) in terms of the opportunity cost of not investing that money.
It's a nice house but it's a 3-5 year house, not a forever home and there are lots of them in the area. I can wait for a few more months

No on the low offer - it's had a sensible offer on it from a cash buyer who is just liquifying some other investments I think.

If you can wait then that would seem sensible, I don't see interest rates going north anytime soon