Worried that I didn't receive consent from landlord for renovations...

[hyperbole001]

I’m concerned that I didn’t receive the required landlord consent to carry out the renovations that I did on my flat and that this will now cause me ramifications when I eventually come to sell.

I live in a leasehold block of flats (13 flats in total) and have a share of the freehold. I enquired with the estate agent before making an offer to see if I could renovate as the flat had only ever had tenants in, and was in a sorry state (kitchen was rotting and the bathroom was covered in mould) – my offer also reflected this. The estate agents said it wouldn’t be an issue and they were aware that another flat owner had recently renovated their bathroom.

After completing, I enquired again as I was keen to get renovations underway and completed before I moved in. The estate agent put me in the touch with the managing agent of the building who works on behalf of the landlord/residents, and is essentially our main contact for when anything goes wrong.

I specifically asked if I could replace both the bathroom and the kitchen but also whether I was allowed to remove a boiler that had been placed on an external wall and reposition this elsewhere (my builder requested I check as some flats insist that boilers are placed on an external wall). The response I got from the managing agent was the following:

“Boiler should be able to be moved without permission as well as changing the bathroom and kitchen as it is not going to be effecting the exterior of the block”

Does this constitute consent from landlord? The managing agent is the go-between – we don’t have any contact with the landlord.

In my naïve FTB state, I should have studied the lease, which I now have and which stipulates that permission needs to be sort before any renovations take place, particularly if there are structural changes. Now I didn’t knock though any walls etc, but we did replumb the kitchen, add extra sockets, reposition a radiator, and reposition the boiler as mentioned above. Does this constitute a ‘structural change’?

The lease also states that lessees should ‘redecorate’ the flat every 5 years to ensure it is kept in a good state – when I purchased the flat it was clear that it hadn’t been redecorated in its 12yr history.

I’m basically wondering if I have any legs by showing them the email I have from the managing agent, should I come to sell in a few years, and be asked about whether I sought consent?

Can anyone help?

What you have done is fine, so don’t worry

I owned a leasehold flat, did updates, sold: all no issues

@BoomChicka when yoy buy a leasehold property you buy the length of the lease not the bricks and mortar. If you were to let the lease run to 0 you'd then have to return the property back to the freeholder.

But its your flat you own it damn cheek having to ask to do modifications in your own place. If it wasn't structural I woukdnt worry about it

You mean the leaseholder?
Not the landlord.
It's fine op don't worry.

There seems some confusion on these thread

The Landlord mentioned in the lease is the freeholder. It is typically a company. Share of freehold means owning a percentage of that. You don’t own the freehold to your particular flat. It’s definitely better than leasehold.

The Flat owner wears 2 hats. As a leaseholder and a share owner of the freehold company (and often a director)

When a leaseholder wants to make alterations they often need a Licence to Alter.
There are usually some admin charges. It’s more for knocking out walls and say moving a bathroom from the back of the house to the front rather than replacing a bathroom.
If you don’t have this sort of set up you can have all sorts of trouble worth people thinking they can do what they want in their flat but sharing a structure with other flats.

[quote Dazedandconfused10]@BoomChicka when yoy buy a leasehold property you buy the length of the lease not the bricks and mortar. If you were to let the lease run to 0 you'd then have to return the property back to the freeholder.[/quote]
Thanks, it was the talk of landlords and permission to decorate etc that threw me. Needing permission to make structural changes that could affect the other flats is obviously sensible.

@MadnessMolly
You wouldn't usually need permission for simple decoration. The lease may even (like the OP's) specify how often you need to redecorate. Probably not enforced that often but useful if someone lets a flat get into bad repair. Some terms may not be enforceable e.g. I've had a lease which says must be with lead paint!

@Jarstastic leases can be mad though - must have net curtains, can't hang drying clothes in view of windows.

Knocking down a wall could lead you to losing the property (I can't remember the case off the top of my head, was in Brighton)

[quote Dazedandconfused10]@Jarstastic leases can be mad though - must have net curtains, can't hang drying clothes in view of windows.

Knocking down a wall could lead you to losing the property (I can't remember the case off the top of my head, was in Brighton)[/quote]
@Dazedandconfused10 ive recently seen in a house deed a restrictive covenant of no hanging washing in the garden, and in another house deed only hanging washing during the week and only if suitably screened !

Lots of misusing of terms on here which is confusing people.

You did the right thing Op by writing to the managing agent about issues your lease says you needed consent for. The reply you quoted from them is the consent.

In liklihood, no-one will be worried about such internal issues anyway, but sticking to the letter if the lease is never a bad thing and when you sell you can provide the solicitor with that short reply you had and it will smooth the way that the work you did was granted permission. Keep the letter or email.

I own a leasehold flat and we recently had it re-rendered. The lease makes us responsible for doing it, but also says we must inform the freeholder and consent must not be withheld unreasonably. We didn’t expect there to be any issue - we named the local workman we had hired and sent the quote and they replied with a similar one sentence message to say it was fine, work noted and permission granted.

It’s never the wrong thing to do to stick exactly to the lease in these matters. Sometimes when people don’t, it’s an issue which doesn’t matter and no one is bothered by, but often on MN you read if people who’ve done work and not had permission and it is a big problem and difficulty when selling. There’s just no need to get into that mess. Leaseholders are the owners of the flat but the position is different to owning a house and the freedoms are not as great. People buying flats need to understand their lease and to ensure they stick to the terms. If they do that and ensure permissions are granted, when selling everything should be smooth.

Thanks all, the responses to this thread have reassured me. I too had read of instances where permission wasn't sought, and people ended up losing their home! Granted, in the specific case I read about, the lessee refused to return the flat to its original state which the judge took a dim view of.

Speaking to a Scottish friend of mine who told me the same system doesn't exist in Scotland. You buy a flat, you own the freehold. None of this leasehold/freehold malarky. Really not sure why we don't have similar, but I guess there are arguments for both cases. Still, i'm lucky that we have a reasonable service charge (circa £1600 a year) for London.