UK Landlord Forum / Life

Hi, has anyone had experience re -
1890 house converted into 5 flats properly managed by London Managing Agents. Tenants say why should we pay for a previous Landlord's bad building work in converting the flats?

The crux: if it comes to light that a previous Landlord-A (to the current one B) damaged a building's structural beam in 1960s, when converting building, causing a ceiling to falls in 2009 - is it a legitimate Interim Service Charge item 'to include the cost of fixing beam, ceiling and collateral damage' now?
If not – why not?


......Lease extract
5     LESSOR'S COVENANTS

5.4 Subject to and conditional upon payment being made by the Tenant of the Interim Charge and Further Interim Charge (as appropriate) and the Service Charge at the times and in the manner hereinbefore provided (provided nevertheless that the obligation contained in Clause 5.4.3 shall be absolute and not conditional and subject as aforesaid):

5.4.1 To maintain and keep in good and substantial repair and condition:
(a) the main structure of the Building including the principal internal timbers and the exterior walls and the foundations and the roof thereof with its main water tanks main drains gutters and rainwater pipes (other than those included in this demise or in the demise of any other flat in the Building);  ......                 stop


.......Lease extract
LEASEES' SERVICE CHARGE COVENANTS


THE FIFTH SCHEDULE
The Service Charge
In this Schedule the following expressions have the following meanings respectively:
the   total   expenditure   incurred   by   the   Lessor   in   any
Accounting Period in carrying out their obligations under Clause 5.4
of  this  Lease  and  any  other  costs  and  expenses  reasonably  and
properly  incurred  in  connection  with  the  Building  including  without
prejudice to the generality of the foregoing: .......            stop     

thanks in advance for any help to get leasees to pay up. Any evidence or case law or examples welcome

Surely this is covered by either building or contents insurance?

Jools

Also - how are you supposed to inspect the 'hidden' aspects, including the principle timbers, if the structure ie covered by the ceiling boards, unless you rip the ceiling down or take up the floorboards? Unreasonable clause as it does not say how often it should be inspected or by whom - ie your mate with a torch or a structural engineer?. Must you rip down the ceiling every 10 years?

When the house was bought was a survey done?

Did the ceiling fail suddenly or over a period of time?

HAve you had a structural engineer/surveyor look at the failure to establish cause?

Jools

Hi,

412b: The insurance will cover 50% - so they say !!!

Also - how are you supposed to inspect the 'hidden' aspects, including the principle timbers, if the structure ie covered by the ceiling boards, unless you rip the ceiling down or take up the floorboards? Unreasonable clause as it does not say how often it should be inspected or by whom - ie your mate with a torch or a structural engineer?. Must you rip down the ceiling every 10 years?

412b:This is a fairly standard clause in Converted blocks. In essence unreasonable to have to 'inspect' as you say - but in practice it is for I suppose when something goes wrong like now.


When the house was bought was a survey done?

412b:  No by us the landlord. I'd say that - the leasees had this obligation as it was them buying into a defective building. But I need precedents not assumption or speculations to break the impasse.


Did the ceiling fail suddenly or over a period of time?
412b: Over time poss 40+ years!!!!!

Have you had a structural engineer/surveyor look at the failure to establish cause? 
412b: Yes and he says attributed to work/damage  done at the conversion and has supplied the scheme to fix it.


Did the ceiling fail suddenly or over a period of time?

HAve you had a structural engineer/surveyor look at the failure to establish cause?

As I said - I need chapter and verse in black and white to move ahead.

thx for your help.

The complexity of ownership can come as quite a shock for many people who pay for a flat or apartment to find that, in fact, they are only part of the surface with it.