New owner of downstairs flat saying I can’t let out property
I own a 1st floor London flat in a 2 story purpose built maisonette in a residential street where the majority of flats are let out. It is share of freehold with a shared garden.
Recently the ground floor flat was sold and the new owner wanted me to exclude my tenants (4 people) from the garden as he wanted to enjoy sole access. I declined as my tenants have cleary rented my property on the basis that they can use the garden but I suggested he might want to buy it from me. Now he is quoting the lease (“… to keep and use the demised premises and all buildings for the time being standing thereon as a private flat and curtilage only in the occupation of one family and for no other purpose”) and insinuating I cannot let the flat out.
Clearly it was rented when he bought his, he knew this and was happy to proceed. The icing on the cake however is his last comment saying that if I effectively give him the garden he doesn’t mind me renting the flat out. So I guess a form of blackmail.
Anyone got any experience that may help here?
Clearly I am minded now to ensure he never, ever gets sole access to the garden.
Thanks in advance
Colin
Comments
Have Your Say
Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
Previous Article
Selling a property that has a restrictionNext Article
New legislation for compulsory purchase orders
Comments: 11
5:20 PM, 9th July 2015, About 11 years ago
Brazen it out, he’s all talk, tell him you will sue him for your legal costs, interfering with your rights to quiet possession, and let him do is worst, be Mr Cool … County Court fear often stops them in their tracks ..
Member Since July 2015 - Comments: 6
11:09 PM, 9th July 2015, About 11 years ago
Reply to the comment left by “Bob Sherwood” at “09/07/2015 – 17:20“:
A friend had a very similar problem a few years ago with the term ‘family’ being on the covenant. His solicitor concluded that ‘family’ was such a loose term that the 3 sharers that were in the flat could be classed as such – problem solved.
Member Since July 2013 - Comments: 755
12:55 PM, 11th July 2015, About 11 years ago
Did the new owner know about the four sharers before he bought the flat and proceeded anyway? If so, it might be argued that he has ‘acquiesced in the breach’ (a legal term), and has no basis to complain now.
Member Since June 2015 - Comments: 5
9:51 AM, 13th July 2015, About 11 years ago
Reply to the comment left by “Freda Blogs” at “11/07/2015 – 12:55“:
Thanks Freda yes they knew!