I have edited this down as no-one was responding!
I live in a building that comprises of 3 flats. My partner and I bought the top flat in October 2012 since when we have been petitioning for essential work to be carried out on the roof. The previous freeholders were an elderly couple who lived in the flat that we now occupy until they each died. The new freeholder has now engaged us all in a Section 20 consultation, we have all now responded and Gala Properties has sent their response to our comments with all of our letters attached.
I believe one of the neighbours’ letters shows their complicity in the historical neglect and negligence with respect to the building over 40 years and that my partner and myself should not be liable for the increase in damages even though the old freeholder is deceased.
The letter also demonstrates their complicity in the collection of services charges over the decades that never went towards repairs or into a sinking but rather went into the freeholder’s pocket.
Is there any chance of a claim that we should shoulder less of the financial burden owing to the neglect and negligence of the other lessees during this very long period where they knew the building was deteriorating, knew no repairs were carried out (except by ‘cowboys’), knew the freeholders were elderly and not up to the job and knew that the service charge they were paying went nowhere?
I can attach the letter for your perusal if you think so.
I am very keen to have an answer so please do continue.
Thanks for your hard work.
I would like to persist unless you think its not worth it. Why is my question putting lawyers off?