Do new freeholders have to honor old agreements?

When you paid the premium at purchase of the lease to the flat, didn’t your conveyancer search for the titleholder of the freehold interest?
The lease is a legally binding contract meaning you as party to this contract are bound by its obligations.
The freeholder whoever it is has no legal right to interfere alter falsify or otherwise mess about with your lease registered at the Land Registry under your Title ownership

Likely this agreement as in writing ought to have been included in the legal pack.

The previous freeholder has got shot of his problem property so not likely to communicate with you.

What do the buildings insurer’s say? There is usually a clause for payment if a flat is uninhabitable.

Reply to the comment left by Kizzie at 27/06/2024 - 10:14
Hello Kizzie.Thank you for your post. When you ask about the title holder for the freehold interest. I know who this is. However, they have advised that prior to the auction sale, no-one asked them about the agreement. Also they were intending to buy the property back from the Bridging loan company, and therefore disclosure of this the agreement was never disclosed to the auction house. Perspective buyers neither came forward and made enquiries prior to the auction.

Reply to the comment left by Judith Wordsworth at 27/06/2024 - 10:17
Hello Judith,
Thank you for your post. I have access to the previous freeholder, but they are unresponsive to confirm the agreement, as I need their permission to disclose the agreement to the new freeholder. The building insurers at the time had advised, the demise of the roof was down to wear and tear and therefore any damage was not covered under the policy, as the subsequent damage to thefts beneath would have been preventable if the freeholder had replaced it. (The roof couldn't be repaired it had to be replaced).

Hi again
In your original message you said: ‘derelict’ did you mean unfit for human habitation?
and ‘reinstated’ did you mean move back in?
Property was sold’ - the FH did not first offer FH to existing leaseholders in breach of landlord & tenant act
Auction house correct-you are still legally bound by terms of your lease
‘Your lost rent? -do you mean service charge and GR under your lease? Yes you are still required to pay this.
Your compensation rental agreement with original FH is nothing to do with new FH

The issue lies with the new FH and their negligent conveyancers who didn’t undertake due diligence and Searches before the auction and not you.

Your issue is whether under terms of your lease you are liable for structural repairs which is unlikely AND most importantly to whom you pay service charge and GR.

You need to apply to First Tier property tribunal to determine to whom you pay it. Under your lease it is the old FH written as named party and you can’t pay it to new FH.

You need urgent advice from a properly qualified competent in leasehold and property law solicitor otherwise your lease will be unsaleable

Reply to the comment left by Kizzie at 27/08/2024 - 15:37
Hello Kizzie.Thank you for coming back. When I say derelict, I mean that the roof, had made my flat completely derelict. So yes, unfit for human habitation. When I say reinstate, I mean the previous landlord agreed my flat would be returned back to its former state, before the roof damage. The roof in question only affects 2 flats and not the other 6. So the new FH have said the bill will be paid just between us.. As the roof ruined my property, the landlord agreed to pay the mortgage, (which wasn't a lot at the time) until he could afford to pay for the roof and the refurbishment. Otherwise I would be liable to pay towards the roof. So in honesty if they are compensating me for loss of rent, I am happy to pay half the cost for the roof, but my argument is that they need to still reinstate my flat.