Ask a Scots Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
Can you upload your title sheet for the flat please. You can send it to***@******.*** and ask the moderator to forward it to JGM.
Thank you, I'll look out for it.
I have read your title. I understand that you are very upset about this, but in terms of the title of a majority decide on a scheme of common repairs, all proprietors are bound by that and I don't know of any law or statute that would help you. The grant situation in Glasgow would always be uncertain but it wouldn't stop a majority making decisions in terms of the title deeds. I'm happy to discuss further as I understand your frustration but I don't consider the proprietors have done anything wrong here.
In what way are they misbehaving? Are they not just agreeing that repairs are needed to the property? Note this is not TMS as there is a mechanism, it, majority decision to undertake common repairs, in the title to the property so TMS isn't applicable. This is a heritable right laid down by the title deeds.
TMS applies if there is no procedure laid down for the management and execution of common repairs. In your title there is. The title lays down a procedure for making decision so the Act doesn't apply.
No I'm not saying the minority have to pay more. I'm saying that the majority can agree the repairs. The title deeds say what the division of costs are.
You can't be asked to pay more than your one fifth share of the costs, less any grant that may or may not have become available.
I'm not sure that you could go to the sheriff so long after the event. This is a chain of events which is not unique where expensive repairs are needed to tenement properties in Glasgow. Some of the owners get together in contemplation of a repair, they get a quote and all of a sudden a selling owner is stuck with the concept of proposed repairs which have to disclosed to a potential purchaser and can affect the purchase price or even make the property unsaleable. Unfortunately, there is no court that will find a repairs burden by majority unreasonable where there is a need for the repair to be done. If you think that the process was carried out recklessly or negligently by the other owners then you will have to state why you have a legal and relevant case for that, perhaps in the context of an action for damages against those against whom you have these issues.