A share of freehold can sound reassuring when you buy a flat. The residents have more control over the building, rather than depending entirely on an outside landlord.
Then a building-safety problem emerges. You discover that collectively owning the freehold may affect the statutory protections against remediation costs that you expected to have.
If the ownership arrangement came with a financial risk you did not understand, what were you told before you bought?
The government’s announcement on 27 October 2026 brings this question into focus. It identifies a funding gap affecting collectively owned and enfranchised buildings, alongside plans to provide further support.
What did “share of freehold” mean in your purchase?
The expression does not tell you everything about the legal arrangements.
You may own a leasehold flat and hold shares or membership in a company that owns the building’s freehold. Alternatively, individuals may hold the freehold directly.
A residents’ management company can also manage a building without owning its freehold. Taking responsibility for management is not the same as acquiring the building.
Start with the lease, registered titles and company documents. Establish who owns the freehold, what interest you acquired and which organisation has the relevant obligations.
There is a separate question about whether your company interest was properly transferred. Our article on buying a share of freehold but finding the company share is still not in your name explains the records to check.
Why can collective ownership affect building-safety cost protection?
In England, the Building Safety Act 2022 contains protections restricting the recovery of certain historical remediation costs from leaseholders. Their application depends on statutory conditions.
Section 117 of the Act excludes certain collectively enfranchised and leaseholder-owned buildings from the definition of a relevant building used for these protections.
This makes the ownership structure important. It is not enough to establish that the property is a flat or that its owner lives there.
However, an exclusion from these particular financial protections does not mean the whole Building Safety Act is irrelevant or that every proposed charge is automatically payable.
Managing the building is a different question
A right to manage company or residents’ management company may carry out management functions while a separate party continues to own the freehold.
The government’s guidance on leaseholder-managed and leaseholder-owned buildings distinguishes those situations.
Do not assume that membership of a residents’ company establishes which category applies. Equally, the presence of a managing agent does not establish that the residents have no ownership responsibilities.
Ask for the conclusion to be explained by reference to your building’s actual arrangements.
What did the government announce in October 2026?
The government announcement of 27 October 2026 includes new funding towards high-risk, high-cost internal fire-safety remediation in collectively owned and enfranchised buildings.
This recognises a gap affecting residents who collectively own their building. The announcement says further eligibility and funding details will follow.
It should not be treated as confirmation that your building qualifies, that a particular bill will be covered or that funding has already been approved.
Obtain written information about any scheme being pursued for your building, the work it may cover and the costs that remain unresolved.
Does this mean the residents must fund everything?
No such conclusion should be drawn from the words “share of freehold” alone.
Eligible cladding funding and routes to recover contributions from responsible parties may still be available. Those possibilities require investigation alongside the ownership structure.
A funding commitment also needs careful reading. Ask which defects, works and associated expenses it covers, and whether there are conditions or exclusions.
For an individual owner, useful questions include:
- What defect has been identified, and by whom?
- Which works are proposed, and what is their estimated cost?
- Who is responsible for arranging the work?
- What funding or recovery routes have been investigated?
- What is the basis for asking you to contribute?
- Is the amount a preliminary estimate or a formal demand?
A general statement that “the building is covered” should be followed by an explanation of what that means for the particular expenditure.
What was explained before you committed to buy?
There are two questions: whether the ownership arrangements were identified and whether their material implications were explained.
A Report on Title might describe your company share, voting rights or responsibility for contributing towards repairs. What did it say about any building-safety issues relevant to the transaction?
The purchase records may help establish:
- What the conveyancer understood about the freehold ownership.
- What the seller and managing agent disclosed about defects and proposed works.
- Whether available assessments, estimates and funding information were obtained.
- What was concluded about the applicable cost protections.
- What financial uncertainty was explained before exchange.
- Whether further investigation or specialist advice was recommended.
The purchase date matters. A review of advice given before the statutory protections existed must reflect the law and information available then. Current requirements should not simply be applied retrospectively.
A company share and a safety document answer different questions
Confirmation that your company membership was registered does not establish the building’s condition or the funding available for remediation.
Similarly, an EWS1 or another technical document does not, by itself, determine who must pay for particular works.
If a sale or remortgage has stalled, identify the specific outstanding question. Is the concern about the building’s condition, ownership, funding, missing documents or the proposed lender’s requirements?
Our guide to selling a flat after cladding remediation explains why completed works, financial responsibility and mortgage acceptance need separate consideration.
This is different from inheriting a previous owner’s non-qualifying lease
Another building-safety problem can arise where a lease’s qualifying status depends on an earlier owner’s circumstances at the statutory qualifying date.
That requires a different investigation from the question of whether a collectively owned building falls within the relevant statutory framework.
Our article on why a previous owner’s property portfolio can affect building-safety protection explores that separate issue.
For conveyancers: explain the ownership consequences
A buyer may understand “share of freehold” as a benefit without appreciating the responsibilities accompanying it.
Where building safety is relevant, the report should connect the ownership arrangements with the enquiries, available information and unresolved financial questions. Recording the structure is only part of explaining the purchase.
Lexsure’s Knowledge Hub includes a specific Report on Title paragraph, Building Safety Act 2022: Freehold owned by Leaseholders.
The public entry is dated 18 July 2024. Firms should assess the full wording against current law, subsequent developments and the transaction’s circumstances before using it.
Does an unexpected bill mean the original advice was wrong?
An unexpected cost does not, by itself, establish negligence. Neither does the government’s recognition of a gap in protection.
The relevant assessment concerns the agreed retainer, purchase date, information available, enquiries made and advice given. A defect discovered later may raise different questions from a substantial proposed bill disclosed before exchange.
If you are concerned, request the original Report on Title, management information, relevant enquiries and correspondence. Ask the firm to explain how it addressed the ownership structure and any known building-safety exposure.
Continue dealing with the immediate issue while obtaining those records. Take appropriate advice about payment demands, transaction deadlines and any applicable legal time limits.
You bought a share of freehold. Were the building-safety implications explained?
If an unexpected remediation bill or uncertainty about cost protection is affecting your flat, visit When I Bought’s cladding and building-safety page.
Tell us when you bought, what you understood about the freehold and what has now emerged. You do not need to decide whether anyone was at fault before starting a conversation.
Building-safety problem? Explore what you were told when buying →
When I Bought is a Lexsure service. It is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice.
This article concerns England and reflects checks made on 31 October 2026. Ownership structures, statutory protections, funding eligibility and responsibility for costs require assessment for the particular building. Announced support should not be treated as an approved funding award.