„Es hat mein Leben ruiniert“: Wohnungseigentümerin sagt, Bauarbeiten eines Grundeigentümers hätten sie obdachlos gemacht
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c17xp1dprn7o
Von No-Particular-2894
„Es hat mein Leben ruiniert“: Wohnungseigentümerin sagt, Bauarbeiten eines Grundeigentümers hätten sie obdachlos gemacht
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c17xp1dprn7o
Von No-Particular-2894
12 Kommentare
>Kate says her home insurance company wouldn’t pay out because the property had not been watertight.
That seems pretty unreasonable considering the policy holder is not responsible for removing the roof and has no way of making the property watertight.
I’d assume if a neighbour damages your property then insurance would provide support, surely it should be the same if the building owner does the same.
Reasons to never buy a ~~freehold~~ leasehold number 1, 2 and 3.
Also the phoenixing of companies needs to fucking stop.
It was a massive problem (especially around building) in New Zealand when I lived there, and it’s just as much of a problem here – note the previous freeholder was ordered to pay £100k in damages, but sold the freehold to some other new company for £300k, liquidated, leaving no money (legally) for the damages to be paid out.
I’ve no doubt Mr Raza owns the new company that bought the freehold, probably through a proxy person.
*Edit*: I meant leasehold, it’s early. Thanks u/foodieshoes.
> When the case started in April this year, the judge said he had received a letter informing him that the freeholder, Magnitude Developments Ltd, had commenced liquidation proceedings
> Since the company was in liquidation, the leaseholders tried to join Ameen Raza, its former director, to their legal complaint. Their barrister argued that although Magnitude was the legal freeholder, Mr Raza had exercised significant financial control.
> A second judge in a later hearing accepted there were „serious concerns“ in the case, but he denied the application to make Mr Raza personally liable
System working as designed then.
How is it allowed to decide to build two more flats on top of an existing block lol, I know freeholders have broad rights but this feels like a cartoonishly villainous scheme
I read this, earlier. Absolutely mental that this shit can basically rob you of your home.
Everything she owned, basically fucked because the greedy freeholder wanted to increase his wealth by bolting on a few extra flats and probably got his mates to do the work, who inevitably had fuck all clue on how to do anything.
I know nowt about the legalities of leasehold, but surely there is some form of liability insurance the freeholder must’ve had?
Absolute scumbag, folding the company and leaving it like that.
Why does the UK have such huge problems with this? I had a leasehold in Sweden and everything was great, the fees went up a bit with the interest rates but for the most part they were attentive and tried to fix issues (e.g. with lifts, providing bulky item removal, etc.).
What is different in the UK vs. most of Europe? I’d be scared to buy any flat in England now.
I know limited liability is an important thing for companies but it seems to be massively abused in cases like this. We’ve got someone whose ruined the lives of multiple people, potentially devastating then financially depending on how this all shakes out with insurance etc and who has assets that could be sold to make people whole again (financially at least) but may well just get to walk away from it all, maybe with some capital loss bus certainly nothing of the same level of devastation those caught up in this face
That is an absurd story. How could it be legal to do that sort of building work with people inside the building?
Leasehold law needs seriously reforming or banning. I owned one flat once and it was a nightmare, had to pay £350 for a letter saying „yes x does live here“ when were were selling it, total scum a lot of freehold companies are. I would rather live in a derelict shack and slowly do it up myself than buy a leasehold again.
You’re not a „flat owner“ if you are leasehold. There’s nothing wrong with leasing, but people do need to understand that they’re not owners.
Really shitty behaviour from the insurer here, if you insure a leasehold flat you are surely insuring the flat and not the building, since you don’t own and have no control over the building. They need to write to the „consumer rights champions“ bits of the media and shame the insurer into paying out, if the insurance documents actually allow them to not pay.
The freeholder and builders should be paying for everyone’s loss of value, since this debacle is their fault. And the freehold shouldn’t have been allowed to be sold while the dispute was going on. Sadly I suspect there is nowhere near enough money recoverable from those businesses to cover the damage.
According to the linked article the freehold was sold (and the new freeholder caused all the problems)… I was under the impression that leaseholders had the right to first refusal in the case of the freehold being offered for sale? 🤔
And this didn’t happen once, it was sold a second time after the first buyer went into liquidation.
The article doesn’t say anything about these leaseholders being offered the freehold and neglecting to buy it, on either occasion, in which what the hell happened and where do they stand legally? Was either sale actually legal? Probably, but shouldn’t be!
Flat ownership in England is insane, and its all down to hundreds of years of corrupt landlords/politicians fleecing the „lower“ classes.
These issues could have been fixed at any time in the last century, but funnily enough, successive governments, whose MP’s are very often landowners and landlords, have done absolutely nothing apart from pointless „reviews“ whilst making no meaningful changes to the law.
My own flat „management“ company, changes its legal name every few years so residents cant take them to court for their ridiculous service charges and non existent services. Despite the fact that they stay in the same building with the same owners.
They just change the ltd to a slightly different name so that it has has no legal responsibility for previous transgressions. But if you as a leaseholder fail to pay every year, then good luck trying to sell your flat! Not paying the criminal scumbags who own the freehold is illegal!
And to the idiots who say don’t buy leasehold, the vast majority of flats in England are leasehold, and unless you’re rich enough to buy a house, you have no choice.