Clauses in lease - is this normal and AIBU?

[MinesaBottle]

I posted a while ago about our neighbours/co-freeholders requiring us to sign a lease extension for them and also hand over our ownership of 50% of the loft – for free! To update, we got legal advice, got a survey done and the neighbours have agreed to pay us a reasonable sum, so that’s all good.

The buyer wants to do a loft conversion (it’s the upstairs flat) and I have no real objection except he wants it written into the lease that we allow access to scaffolders and builders (there is no access to our garden from the back, so tradesmen would have to come through our house which I am not happy about) and also wants it in the lease that we won’t object to the planning application! I am not happy with this either, as I am not going to promise not to object to something I haven’t even seen the plans for.

Obviously we’re consulting our solicitor but has anyone else had this? Is it normal? I really wouldn’t have thought it would be necessary to put this kind of thing in the lease itself. I guess he’s trying to get as much as he can and will be open to negotiation, but we are co-freeholders, not his tenants or employees!

Scaffolders and builders through your house? No no no.!
Not only is that entirely unreasonable, but it will affect the value of your house when you come to sell, when prospective buyers see it in your deeds.

I think that's really cheeky. We agreed to allow next door to erect scaffolding in our garden/drive. To be honest it was a right PITA. I'm aware we could have asked for payment for this but we didn't want to be mean. It was hugely inconvenient and went on for several months. The original plans were grossly unfair and we did put in an objection and it was reduced substantially in size as a result.

So I personally wouldn't sign this. I think he's got an absolute cheek. He should be paying you for that access to his property. Ours was all outside but no way would I agree for builders to come through my home for what could be several months. The loss of privacy would be dreadful. It was bad enough having them right outside the windows every day, all day.

Youre going to see your solicitor- go with their advice. Nobody here can help you like your solicitor will be able to

It sounds crazy, your solicitor is the best person to advise you how to proceed

I don't think those things at the types of things that go into the lease.

I would agree to access fore scaffolding for a period of [x] weeks (est time of build), any time after that charged at £100/day plus agree an upfront amount that is to be retained and released once the scaffold co have made good your garden.

I would not agree to any access other than for the initial scaffolding work. They can go up to the upstairs flat and onto the scaffolding.

Oh and he also wants it written into the lease that we won't claim any funds in relation to all this. Who the hell does he think he is?!

None of that stuff goes in a lease imo

Maybe a separate legal agreement only relating to the works

So what is in it for you OP? He wants the moon on a stick, and you are getting what??? It is too late to pull out of the agreement entirely? I would not hand over the rights to 50% of the roof space, regardless of the amount he was paying. I would say you have serious concerns about the deal given that he is now demanding so many clauses to be added to the lease. Seriously, this is so cheeky!

You say you are not bothered about the loss of the roof space but future buyers might be so be careful doing any deal that might devalue or make your property less attractive in the future. YANBU to say no, as you point out he is not your boss or landlord.

as others have said - nothing to do with the lease - separate agreement.

and make sure it is commercial - if there is any objection, just smile and be calm about it "we feel that having it on a good commercial basis works well for both sides". If it is commercial with a cost per week / penalties for damages or overrun - then the builders have an incentive to look after your property and finish it sooner... otherwise there is no incentive and they can leave your property in chaos.

I really don't mind the loss of roof space as we don't have access anyway and we are being fairly compensated - based on our surveyor's report. It's just the buyer's attitude that has really pissed me off! He's buying to let and owns a few other similar properties, so it's possible he's run into objections in the past.

As you say akkakk we need to keep this on a commercial basis. I am not exactly enthralled by his attitude so far, though.

Nip the whole project in the bud before he is having written into it that you supply the builders with post of tea and bacon sandwiches daily!! He is taking the piss.

We should have it written in that they can't use our toilet...

Seriously though, we both work and I'm not taking time off so I can sit at home to let scaffolders in. I also don't want the cat escaping into the street, which is a risk if the front door is open. He normally goes in the back garden but is, of course, a nosy little sod.

It sounds like the buyer is pissed off that he has to pay you to use the loft, so is trying to get his monies worth by adding extra bits into the clause in return for the cash he has shelled out. I am not even sure if its enforceable. You have a legal right to object to any planning applications, writing it into the lease does not change that.

From the OP :
he wants it written into the lease that we allow access to scaffolders and builders (there is no access to our garden from the back

If that is in the lease it will be permanent and will affect the value of the house. This neighbour or any subsequent neighbour will have the right to bring ladders or equipment through your house whenever they need to carry out maintenance on the back of their house.
Just say no.

Now you don't own any part of the loft are you still responsible for the roof? If so that would bother me with all the work going on , you could find yourself with a repair bill

crikey that would a be a NO from me

Time to make some demands of your own re adequate soundproofing and a clause in his lease specifying no hard flooring above your flat to protect you from future misery on that front...

Do you rent or own?

We own (share of freehold, so 50% of it as there are 2 flats). The current co-freeholders upstairs have already caused years of grief having taken out the carpets and just used bare floorboards; however now they've come to sell they've suddenly agreed with us that it's a breach and are re-carpeting before they leave.

Re the roof, the demise includes airspace - I need to double check if the roof is included.

What's really pissed me off here is the attitude - haven't even met him yet and he's already throwing his weight around. He needs to remember we are co-freeholders, not his tenants. I just hope, after the current neighbours, that we don't end up with another self-absorbed, entitled prick who thinks he can do whatever the hell he likes.

If he was so desperate for a three-bed place why didn't he buy one?! By the end of this he'll have spent pretty much the equivalent amount anyway

Tell him to get lost. He can't force you to give the builders access and why should you not complain about the planning permission if you think it's not right.

Is the garden yours or his? If it's yours there's no way I'd be allowing the builders into it at all.

And put nothing in the lease. If you grant any permissions they should be time limited.

None of this goes in the lease OTHER THAN the grant of rights to tinker with the roof as required for him to get legal title to whatever he's building. In fact I'd probably be inclined to ensure that from his extension, the roof is his demise so that the top flat becomes solely responsible for any cost associated with repair of the roof.

As to the rest:

1. they should pay your reasonable legal and surveyor's fees associated with all this.
2. if it truly is only possible to get scaffolding poles in through your house, then there should be a charge associated with that to cover inconvenience as well as cost of carpet cleaning / repainting / extra insurance premiums (they must agree to be responsible for the excess on any claims caused by their scaffolder, without ref to whether they're' able to recover it from scaffolder). That work can only be carried out on agreed dates in and out.
3. ONce scaffolding is up, no further access through your house for anyone at any time, for anything other than agreed removal of scaffolding.

he's tried to take ou for a fool so my charitable "help the neighbour" feeling has completely evaporated.

I'm confused - why do they need access? Do you have a solicitor? You need to remember that there are two things happening here, are you dealing with this as freeholder or leaseholder?

It could be you've simply received the wrong lease document (mistakes happen). I

It's a terraced building, 19th century, purpose built as 2 maisonettes. As is fairly common in SW London (where we are), the garden, which is solely ours, backs onto the garden of the house behind in the next street. There are no alleys or lanes or ginnels or whatever they're called, so no back gate and no access to the back of the building except through our flat.

We are fine with giving access when needed if there's an emergency such as with the drains, but as I understand it the lease (and the law) does not allow unrestricted access to work in improvements.

We do have a very good solicitor and will be talking to them tomorrow.

He is being really unreasonable and the building work hasn't started yet. I would back out now because the lease negotiations will be like a picnic in the park compared to the actual build. The money isn't worth it.

I just hope, after the current neighbours, that we don't end up with another self-absorbed, entitled prick who thinks he can do whatever the hell he likes.

I think it's pretty obvious that that's exactly what you are getting.

Ok, speak to your solicitors about the issue overall but here is my advice. DON'T BE NICE.

I have lost count of how many threads I have read where nice folk like you have said ok to access, use of garden for scaffolding, all sorts of stuff that they didn't have to agree to at all but they've done it to be nice in the hope that the neighbour/builder/whoever would appreciate the gesture and it would improve relations. BIG MISTAKE - it almost ALWAYS ends up with said neighbour or builder totally taking the piss, because they think they can walk all over you.

I would honestly say that no matter what your solicitor advises, have as your start point a big fat NO FAVOURS. This bloke sounds like an entitled arsehole already and I would put money on it that he's going to cause you all sorts of grief taking the mick wherever he can get away with it.

So start from the point that no, you are not going to agree to a bloody thing which will put you out (hey, you might even get him to move on and create his havoc elsewhere!)

No clauses in lease - why the fuck should you agree to anything that isn't a. for your benefit and b. paid for handsomely?

NO to access. They will royally take the piss if any permission is given to use your property and no, they won't make good the damage. Endless threads on this. Access is their problem and no way are they coming into your house. If he wants to discuss that any further - and you suggest he doesn't even bother until planning permission has gone through - then he'll be paying through the nose for it.

Fuck no to any planning agreement. You can bet that what you will see in those plans will need adjustment if not outright refusal. You'll be considering them and any objections as you see fit.

The final point - yes you are not his bloody inferior, which is what he seems to think. So do yourselves a favour now and let him know in no uncertain terms that he won't be calling the shots when it comes to your property or anything which affects it, by doing all of the above!