Leaseholder - licence to do alterations?
Discussion
Morning,
I own a flat and am a leaseholder.
As you would expect, I am required to obtain permission prior to carrying out any alterations that affect the fabric the flat or layout of the flat.
Now, the freeholders require me to obtain a licence along with the plans from a structural engineer - no problem.
So, this licence then gets created and I am asked to pay over £600 in solictors fees - bear in mind this job is to knock down a two metre long non supporting wall and replace it with a stud wall structure and a set of double doors.
Am I getting shafted? or is this legitimate. My view is its an old boys set up and the £600+ to create a 'licence' is money for old rope.
Extortion!
I own a flat and am a leaseholder.
As you would expect, I am required to obtain permission prior to carrying out any alterations that affect the fabric the flat or layout of the flat.
Now, the freeholders require me to obtain a licence along with the plans from a structural engineer - no problem.
So, this licence then gets created and I am asked to pay over £600 in solictors fees - bear in mind this job is to knock down a two metre long non supporting wall and replace it with a stud wall structure and a set of double doors.
Am I getting shafted? or is this legitimate. My view is its an old boys set up and the £600+ to create a 'licence' is money for old rope.
Extortion!
davidjpowell said:
Be glad it's not commercial premises. I've seen bills in much bigger magnitude.
Ask the solicitor to justify it. He will, and you will have to suck it up sadly.
His justification is 'thats what our standard fees are;.Ask the solicitor to justify it. He will, and you will have to suck it up sadly.
The thing is, I have had to supply drawings at my own cost. I would be satisfied if this £600+ fee included this but it doesn't. Daylight robbery.
Even having a share of the freehold doesn't entitle you to do what you want.
At the end of the day you have an obligation to the other leasholders and freeholder not to damage, or cause damage to the property. A structural alteration is going to impact on parts of the property that you have no right to but others do.
Unfortunately, you can't rely on the goodwill of people to do the job properly so an independant process or protocol needs to be in place.
As for your specific job who's to say it's not structural and how do you support this claim? What would happen if removing the wall caused the building to be unstable and the other occupiers need to be rehoused whilst repairs are completed. Are you going to pay for this without hesitation?
What I am saying is that the License is there to protect you as much as it is freeholders.
A worse case scenario would be that you did the works without following the terms of your lease. Cause damage to the property and the freeholder forfeits the remainder of your lease. Now your mortgage company aren't going to like that as your mortgage then becomes an unsecured loan that you still owe them.
As for extortion, it's only as much as you're overpaid for the work you do.
ETA: Do the works actually need a license to alter though? If it's not a structural alteration and you're replacing like for like - ie a wall is going back in the same place then where is the alteration?
At the end of the day you have an obligation to the other leasholders and freeholder not to damage, or cause damage to the property. A structural alteration is going to impact on parts of the property that you have no right to but others do.
Unfortunately, you can't rely on the goodwill of people to do the job properly so an independant process or protocol needs to be in place.
As for your specific job who's to say it's not structural and how do you support this claim? What would happen if removing the wall caused the building to be unstable and the other occupiers need to be rehoused whilst repairs are completed. Are you going to pay for this without hesitation?
What I am saying is that the License is there to protect you as much as it is freeholders.
A worse case scenario would be that you did the works without following the terms of your lease. Cause damage to the property and the freeholder forfeits the remainder of your lease. Now your mortgage company aren't going to like that as your mortgage then becomes an unsecured loan that you still owe them.
As for extortion, it's only as much as you're overpaid for the work you do.
ETA: Do the works actually need a license to alter though? If it's not a structural alteration and you're replacing like for like - ie a wall is going back in the same place then where is the alteration?
Edited by mk1fan on Tuesday 3rd August 13:19
Edited by mk1fan on Tuesday 3rd August 13:34
mk1fan said:
Even having a share of the freehold doesn't entitle you to do what you want.
At the end of the day you have an obligation to the other leasholders and freeholder not to damage, or cause damage to the property. A structural alteration is going to impact on parts of the property that you have no right to but others do.
Unfortunately, you can't rely on the goodwill of people to do the job properly so an independant process or protocol needs to be in place.
As for your specific job who's to say it's not structural and how do you support this claim? What would happen if removing the wall caused the building to be unstable and the other occupiers need to be rehoused whilst repairs are completed. Are you going to pay for this without hesitation?
What I am saying is that the License is there to protect you as much as it is to protect you as much as it is the freeholders.
A worse case scenario would be that you did the works without following the terms of your lease. Cause damage to the property and the freeholder forfeits the remainder of your lease. Now your mortgage company aren't going to like that as your mortgage then becomes an unsecured loan that you still owe them.
As for extortion, it's only as much as you're overpaid for the work you do.
At the end of the day you have an obligation to the other leasholders and freeholder not to damage, or cause damage to the property. A structural alteration is going to impact on parts of the property that you have no right to but others do.
Unfortunately, you can't rely on the goodwill of people to do the job properly so an independant process or protocol needs to be in place.
As for your specific job who's to say it's not structural and how do you support this claim? What would happen if removing the wall caused the building to be unstable and the other occupiers need to be rehoused whilst repairs are completed. Are you going to pay for this without hesitation?
What I am saying is that the License is there to protect you as much as it is to protect you as much as it is the freeholders.
A worse case scenario would be that you did the works without following the terms of your lease. Cause damage to the property and the freeholder forfeits the remainder of your lease. Now your mortgage company aren't going to like that as your mortgage then becomes an unsecured loan that you still owe them.
As for extortion, it's only as much as you're overpaid for the work you do.
Edited by mk1fan on Tuesday 3rd August 13:16
Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff