This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
I though I had sold my house. At the last minute it fell through, on the basis of it being leasehold. It is, with a 999-year lease and a peppercorn rent. Over the last couple of weeks I have had one viewing which entered around the leasehold, and another viewing which cancelled on the same basis.
It is a house, not a flat, and there are no significant conditions .
I feel stuck. As far as I can tell there should be no issues. Does anyone have any thoughts, views, or comments. As far as I understand, Liverpool council, who are the leaseholders, charge around£2,000 to buy the lease. I could either buy it or drop the price?
It is a house, not a flat, and there are no significant conditions .
I feel stuck. As far as I can tell there should be no issues. Does anyone have any thoughts, views, or comments. As far as I understand, Liverpool council, who are the leaseholders, charge around£2,000 to buy the lease. I could either buy it or drop the price?
In reply to kipper12:
it kinda depends on how much % of value 2k is? would seem to me small change in a house transaction....
I would get in touch with the council and confirm 2k to buy it off them. liver pool could of course be a buyers market and your house needs to be more competively priced?
it kinda depends on how much % of value 2k is? would seem to me small change in a house transaction....
I would get in touch with the council and confirm 2k to buy it off them. liver pool could of course be a buyers market and your house needs to be more competively priced?
In reply to alasdair19:
I dropped from 130k to,120k for the original buyers, and even offered to cut the 120k, by the 2k to,purchase the lease. I jcant understand what is the issue with a long-term lease, on a peppercorn rent.
I dropped from 130k to,120k for the original buyers, and even offered to cut the 120k, by the 2k to,purchase the lease. I jcant understand what is the issue with a long-term lease, on a peppercorn rent.
9
1
In reply to kipper12:
In that case it's unlikely that the leasehold was the real problem.
> I dropped from 130k to,120k for the original buyers, and even offered to cut the 120k, by the 2k to,purchase the lease.
In that case it's unlikely that the leasehold was the real problem.
In reply to kipper12:
I sold my house in the Liverpool area with a 900+year lease and £3.20 per year ground rent with no issues.
Seems like you have just encountered buyers that don't understand what it means.
My deeds also had a clause inserted in the 60's which said said no alterations, no extensions etc without written consent from lease holder did i stick to it? No, I knocked walls down, built extensions just like everyone else in the street. All I did was buy a cheap indemnity insurance on the request of the buyers solicitor and bingo all issues solved though that was separate to the lease, which wasnt an issuse.
I sold my house in the Liverpool area with a 900+year lease and £3.20 per year ground rent with no issues.
Seems like you have just encountered buyers that don't understand what it means.
My deeds also had a clause inserted in the 60's which said said no alterations, no extensions etc without written consent from lease holder did i stick to it? No, I knocked walls down, built extensions just like everyone else in the street. All I did was buy a cheap indemnity insurance on the request of the buyers solicitor and bingo all issues solved though that was separate to the lease, which wasnt an issuse.
Post edited at 22:07
In reply to Alan M:
I'm not sure whether it's stupid buyers or the estate agent who are not really explaining the situation properly. I am really loosing confidence in them.
I'm not sure whether it's stupid buyers or the estate agent who are not really explaining the situation properly. I am really loosing confidence in them.
1
In reply to kipper12:
Leasehold houses are a bit unusual but not unheard of. I actually just bought a leasehold house last month with a 999 year lease and rent of approx £2.50 pa so much like yours.
I won't actually be living in the house myself, I bought it to renovate and sell on, but its on a street which are mostly leasehold houses and there's always a good turnover of houses otherwise I wouldn't have bought it to sell on!
Do you know how many other houses in your area are in the same position and what the turnover is like? Look on Rightmove sold prices for your area, it tells you if they are free/leashold and will give you an idea of the turnover. Zoopla gives % turnover for areas but probably only by postcodes so may be too blunt for what you need to know but worth looking.
If yours is the only one it might spook some people but otherwise it would suggest you've just been unlucky.
You are right in that there should be no issues but I guess some people may misunderstand the situation because its uncommon. Did your estate agent try to pursuade the buyers it was fine or at least tell them to get their solicitor to explain the implications (i.e. very little to worry about). Smoothing over problems is part of the agents job.
I suspect you've just been unlucky and sooner or later you should get someone who'll see sense. If you really need to sell quickly is it too late to go back to the buyer and offer to drop the price in order for them to buy out the lease or meet them half way perhaps?
Leasehold houses are a bit unusual but not unheard of. I actually just bought a leasehold house last month with a 999 year lease and rent of approx £2.50 pa so much like yours.
I won't actually be living in the house myself, I bought it to renovate and sell on, but its on a street which are mostly leasehold houses and there's always a good turnover of houses otherwise I wouldn't have bought it to sell on!
Do you know how many other houses in your area are in the same position and what the turnover is like? Look on Rightmove sold prices for your area, it tells you if they are free/leashold and will give you an idea of the turnover. Zoopla gives % turnover for areas but probably only by postcodes so may be too blunt for what you need to know but worth looking.
If yours is the only one it might spook some people but otherwise it would suggest you've just been unlucky.
You are right in that there should be no issues but I guess some people may misunderstand the situation because its uncommon. Did your estate agent try to pursuade the buyers it was fine or at least tell them to get their solicitor to explain the implications (i.e. very little to worry about). Smoothing over problems is part of the agents job.
I suspect you've just been unlucky and sooner or later you should get someone who'll see sense. If you really need to sell quickly is it too late to go back to the buyer and offer to drop the price in order for them to buy out the lease or meet them half way perhaps?
In reply to pec:
For info: they're very common in Sheffield.
> Leasehold houses are a bit unusual but not unheard of.
For info: they're very common in Sheffield.
1
In reply to kipper12:
Possibly. A lease hold property with nearly a thousand year lease should not be a problem to sell. It wouldn't put me off....why i purchased one and it didnt cause me an issue when I sold it either.
Have you asked the estate agent what they are advising people? The only time I had to mention the ground rent was when asked as part of the sellers pack etc.
> I'm not sure whether it's stupid buyers or the estate agent who are not really explaining the situation properly. I am really loosing confidence in them.
Possibly. A lease hold property with nearly a thousand year lease should not be a problem to sell. It wouldn't put me off....why i purchased one and it didnt cause me an issue when I sold it either.
Have you asked the estate agent what they are advising people? The only time I had to mention the ground rent was when asked as part of the sellers pack etc.
In reply to Alan M:
Do you suspect that this estate agent is just plain stupid and is making an issue where there is none , or is the rare beast that just does not want their share of the sale at the earliest possible date ( with as little effort as possible) at the expense of any truth?
> Have you asked the estate agent what they are advising people? The only time I had to mention the ground rent was when asked as part of the sellers pack etc.
Do you suspect that this estate agent is just plain stupid and is making an issue where there is none , or is the rare beast that just does not want their share of the sale at the earliest possible date ( with as little effort as possible) at the expense of any truth?
In reply to kipper12:
I'd make sure that any buyers are told the freehold can be bought for £2k so if anyone really cares they can do that.
Or you should be able to get your solicitor doing the sale to buy the freehold as part of the sale, so the money comes out of the purchase price. You don't have to put the money up but they get a freehold house when they buy.
Edit - agree with everyone else though, it shouldn't be an issue.
I'd make sure that any buyers are told the freehold can be bought for £2k so if anyone really cares they can do that.
Or you should be able to get your solicitor doing the sale to buy the freehold as part of the sale, so the money comes out of the purchase price. You don't have to put the money up but they get a freehold house when they buy.
Edit - agree with everyone else though, it shouldn't be an issue.
Post edited at 23:48
In reply to Jim C:
No idea, from the information available it seems that confusion is entering the deal at some point. Whether that is buyers not understanding what the leasehold and rent means or an estate agent not explaining the particulars properly or something else causing the deal to collapse I have no idea. The seller is clear that from their perspective it is the leasehold agreement causing the issues.
I'm struggling to think why as a leasehold property with nearly a thousand year lease shouldn't be a cause for concern to buyers. A lot of houses in Liverpool and the surrounding areas are 999 year leasehold properties. My last house was, my current property has a red rose rent meaning it is leasehold but I pay no yearly fee were as the last house was 3.20 per year etc.
Hopefully the OP will get an answer and be able to sell quickly.
> Do you suspect that this estate agent is just plain stupid and is making an issue where there is none , or is the rare beast that just does not want their share of the sale at the earliest possible date ( with as little effort as possible) at the expense of any truth?
No idea, from the information available it seems that confusion is entering the deal at some point. Whether that is buyers not understanding what the leasehold and rent means or an estate agent not explaining the particulars properly or something else causing the deal to collapse I have no idea. The seller is clear that from their perspective it is the leasehold agreement causing the issues.
I'm struggling to think why as a leasehold property with nearly a thousand year lease shouldn't be a cause for concern to buyers. A lot of houses in Liverpool and the surrounding areas are 999 year leasehold properties. My last house was, my current property has a red rose rent meaning it is leasehold but I pay no yearly fee were as the last house was 3.20 per year etc.
Hopefully the OP will get an answer and be able to sell quickly.
Post edited at 00:06
In reply to kipper12:
As others have mentioned I reckon those people probably used that as an excuse for something else, though with that said it might be worth asking your solicitors to confirm that there's nothing in the Lease that could have prompted the purchasers to drop out.
I'd also suggest getting something in writing from the council stating they will sell the freehold for 2k and pass that to your solicitor, they should send it over to the buyer's solicitors along with the initial contract pack. Assuming you haven't already done so ofc.
As others have mentioned I reckon those people probably used that as an excuse for something else, though with that said it might be worth asking your solicitors to confirm that there's nothing in the Lease that could have prompted the purchasers to drop out.
I'd also suggest getting something in writing from the council stating they will sell the freehold for 2k and pass that to your solicitor, they should send it over to the buyer's solicitors along with the initial contract pack. Assuming you haven't already done so ofc.
In reply to marsbar:
Some people and Some Solicitors are stupid. 999 years is not an issue.
Very common in some areas . Your estate agent shouldn't have let this happen . If it was genuinely the reason it's possible that it was the purchasers mortgage that was the issue and your agent should have been onto it , finding a solution either smoothing it over with the mortgage company or persuading the purchaser to swap mortgages . what's very possible is that "the lease" was just an excuse for the purchaser to pull out . Make sure that your estate agent and solicitor are very clear that this not a problem ., if not get new ones.
Some people and Some Solicitors are stupid. 999 years is not an issue.
Very common in some areas . Your estate agent shouldn't have let this happen . If it was genuinely the reason it's possible that it was the purchasers mortgage that was the issue and your agent should have been onto it , finding a solution either smoothing it over with the mortgage company or persuading the purchaser to swap mortgages . what's very possible is that "the lease" was just an excuse for the purchaser to pull out . Make sure that your estate agent and solicitor are very clear that this not a problem ., if not get new ones.
In reply to mike123:
Cheers for responses. I think my solicitor is on the ball. He didn't see any problems, and thought teh original purchasers were poorlyu advised (unless it was just an excuse, as they said they pulled out on advice from their solicitor). As for the estate agent, Im less sure.
Cheers for responses. I think my solicitor is on the ball. He didn't see any problems, and thought teh original purchasers were poorlyu advised (unless it was just an excuse, as they said they pulled out on advice from their solicitor). As for the estate agent, Im less sure.
In reply to kipper12:
Sounds like paranoia to me, the potential buyers not fully understanding leasehold. Our house has about 950 years left on its lease. It is about £18 a year. We were offered to buy it from the leasehold company for £999. I have no idea what this included or if it was good value. The idea of having the freehold was nice, but it has no real value and we would be at least £1k down. I have no idea how you can educate people against their prejudice but that is what it is I reckon.
It is flats that came with a 99 year lease but now only have 20 years left that are the elephants in the room of lease land.
Sounds like paranoia to me, the potential buyers not fully understanding leasehold. Our house has about 950 years left on its lease. It is about £18 a year. We were offered to buy it from the leasehold company for £999. I have no idea what this included or if it was good value. The idea of having the freehold was nice, but it has no real value and we would be at least £1k down. I have no idea how you can educate people against their prejudice but that is what it is I reckon.
It is flats that came with a 99 year lease but now only have 20 years left that are the elephants in the room of lease land.
In reply to Rob Parsons:
Agreed. My first house was leasehold, as is my parents', brothers' and most of my mates (in all Sheffield). Very unusual for someone to pull out due to a house being a (999 year!) leasehold. Common as muck around these parts.
> For info: they're very common in Sheffield.
Agreed. My first house was leasehold, as is my parents', brothers' and most of my mates (in all Sheffield). Very unusual for someone to pull out due to a house being a (999 year!) leasehold. Common as muck around these parts.
In reply to Rob Parsons:
+1, we've prob got 880 years left on ours. We're meant to pay £1 a year ground rent, but in the three years we've been here, no one's asked for it and no one knows who we're meant to pay it to. So we've ignored it.
+1, we've prob got 880 years left on ours. We're meant to pay £1 a year ground rent, but in the three years we've been here, no one's asked for it and no one knows who we're meant to pay it to. So we've ignored it.
In reply to kipper12:
Both houses I've owned in Sheffield had 999 year leases (the first one had only 850 years left to run).
The rents are peppercorn and can't increase. The only issue I've hit is that some companies have bought up leases and then make a 'living' from charging for alterations to the house etc. It's only £15 a letter (and £15 if you want them to respond!) but it's annoying as they are just parasites.
It's all trivia though. I expect to be living on Mars when the lease runs out with my conciousness downloaded into the mind of a robotic llama (think Avatar but with spitting)
Both houses I've owned in Sheffield had 999 year leases (the first one had only 850 years left to run).
The rents are peppercorn and can't increase. The only issue I've hit is that some companies have bought up leases and then make a 'living' from charging for alterations to the house etc. It's only £15 a letter (and £15 if you want them to respond!) but it's annoying as they are just parasites.
It's all trivia though. I expect to be living on Mars when the lease runs out with my conciousness downloaded into the mind of a robotic llama (think Avatar but with spitting)
Post edited at 10:18
1
In reply to kipper12:
Leaseholds are unattractive for many, many reasons.
Legally they are complicated, often they have defective clauses on maintenance and ownership. It seems rare to get two solicitors with the same opinion and attitude to risk.
The freeholder can change and a good relationship can be replaced with one where the charges are extortionate. You have no control as a leaseholder.
Leases often have restrictive clauses which have been ignored by current owners.
Buying the freeholds, or extending the lease can be horrifically complicated and also expensive. You have no legal right to extend until you've lived there two years.
Emotionally, certainly for a house, people probably don't like the idea of still not owning actual assets made of bricks, especially if they've been renting for a long time to save up. Buyers are more wary these days, much more risk averse.
Your solution is to buy the freehold. £2k is a snip and it will make your property more attractive. Continuing down the same path just assuming that buyers are stupid is the road to disappointment and a lengthy sale.
*my experience is from trying to sell a leasehold flat for over two years. I know, not a house.
Leaseholds are unattractive for many, many reasons.
Legally they are complicated, often they have defective clauses on maintenance and ownership. It seems rare to get two solicitors with the same opinion and attitude to risk.
The freeholder can change and a good relationship can be replaced with one where the charges are extortionate. You have no control as a leaseholder.
Leases often have restrictive clauses which have been ignored by current owners.
Buying the freeholds, or extending the lease can be horrifically complicated and also expensive. You have no legal right to extend until you've lived there two years.
Emotionally, certainly for a house, people probably don't like the idea of still not owning actual assets made of bricks, especially if they've been renting for a long time to save up. Buyers are more wary these days, much more risk averse.
Your solution is to buy the freehold. £2k is a snip and it will make your property more attractive. Continuing down the same path just assuming that buyers are stupid is the road to disappointment and a lengthy sale.
*my experience is from trying to sell a leasehold flat for over two years. I know, not a house.
4
1
In reply to kipper12:
Having a different view to you on risk mitigation and control over property is not stupid. I suspect they are either ill-informed, or well informed and have a different perspective to you.
Certainly I wouldn't touch a leasehold property with a bargepole. Too many individuals and asset management firms are going around buying up leaseholds. They wouldn't do it if there was nothing in it for them, and I doubt they're taking the 999 year view. It can only make my life more complicated and unpredictable, and for a £120k house I'd just get one that's freehold round the corner.
You had confidence in them to begin with?
> I'm not sure whether it's stupid buyers
Having a different view to you on risk mitigation and control over property is not stupid. I suspect they are either ill-informed, or well informed and have a different perspective to you.
Certainly I wouldn't touch a leasehold property with a bargepole. Too many individuals and asset management firms are going around buying up leaseholds. They wouldn't do it if there was nothing in it for them, and I doubt they're taking the 999 year view. It can only make my life more complicated and unpredictable, and for a £120k house I'd just get one that's freehold round the corner.
> the estate agent who are not really explaining the situation properly. I am really loosing confidence in them.
You had confidence in them to begin with?
Post edited at 12:01
1
In reply to kipper12:
Reeds Rain by any chance?
> I'm not sure whether it's stupid buyers or the estate agent who are not really explaining the situation properly. I am really loosing confidence in them.
Reeds Rain by any chance?
1
I once run in to a house like that as buyer.
My thinking was that since previous owner didn't got a freehold there may be something dodgy about the lease. And as buyer I would not believe a single word coming out from estate agent mouth. So my choices were to ditch that deal and look at other options or spend time and investigate the situation about that particular lease. Since I was shopping in a buyers market I decided not to waste time.
Post edited at 12:02
1
In reply to kipper12:
Also, are you totally sure that there are no hidden clauses in the lease? I pulled out of buying (flat in Liverpool) because of a % charge/year of ownership on the value of the flat when come to sell the flat. The estate agents neglected to tell me about it, thankfully my solicitor noticed it. Could be worth re-reading the terms.
Good luck. House buying and selling is a pain.
Also, are you totally sure that there are no hidden clauses in the lease? I pulled out of buying (flat in Liverpool) because of a % charge/year of ownership on the value of the flat when come to sell the flat. The estate agents neglected to tell me about it, thankfully my solicitor noticed it. Could be worth re-reading the terms.
Good luck. House buying and selling is a pain.
In reply to cap'nChino:
The agents wouldn't tell you this, it's not in their remit. They often don't get a copy of the Lease let alone know how to read through one and identify things the potential buyer should know about. That's what you pay your solicitor for.
The agents wouldn't tell you this, it's not in their remit. They often don't get a copy of the Lease let alone know how to read through one and identify things the potential buyer should know about. That's what you pay your solicitor for.
In reply to kipper12:
That is really odd. Leasehold houses are very common in some parts of the country, good chunks of Yorkshire are another, and cause no issues to anyone.
That is really odd. Leasehold houses are very common in some parts of the country, good chunks of Yorkshire are another, and cause no issues to anyone.
In reply to cap'nChino:
My solicitor took teh view the lease was not unusual, when I purchased the house, and the current solicitor doesnt see anything unusual in the conditions. As far as I understand it, most of the houses that went up at the same time around me are all leasehold. There are newer properties nearby, which are shared ownership.
My solicitor took teh view the lease was not unusual, when I purchased the house, and the current solicitor doesnt see anything unusual in the conditions. As far as I understand it, most of the houses that went up at the same time around me are all leasehold. There are newer properties nearby, which are shared ownership.
In reply to Removed User:
They knew full well. It emerged after that two sales fell through before mine for this reason and several other flats in the same complex had the clause advertised on their Right Move ads. This particular estate agent chose to omit it from their marketing material and not mention it when quizzed about service charges etc . When I questioned them after first being told about is the girls busted reply was "we weren't tryin' to deceive you or nothin'". Cost be the better part of £1000.
> The agents wouldn't tell you this, it's not in their remit. They often don't get a copy of the Lease let alone know how to read through one and identify things the potential buyer should know about. That's what you pay your solicitor for.
They knew full well. It emerged after that two sales fell through before mine for this reason and several other flats in the same complex had the clause advertised on their Right Move ads. This particular estate agent chose to omit it from their marketing material and not mention it when quizzed about service charges etc . When I questioned them after first being told about is the girls busted reply was "we weren't tryin' to deceive you or nothin'". Cost be the better part of £1000.
In reply to kipper12:
Yeah I think they are common in some places (lots of Northern England), with a pittance rent and no problems. Could be your prospective buyer are from elsewhere where they are unusual and to cause problems.
> My solicitor took teh view the lease was not unusual, when I purchased the house, and the current solicitor doesnt see anything unusual in the conditions.
Yeah I think they are common in some places (lots of Northern England), with a pittance rent and no problems. Could be your prospective buyer are from elsewhere where they are unusual and to cause problems.
In reply to kipper12:
Sound like the buyers getting cold feet. As said already 999 year lease is pretty standard. Best of luck.
Sound like the buyers getting cold feet. As said already 999 year lease is pretty standard. Best of luck.
In reply to kipper12:
What's the turnover of these properties like? If the turnover is reasonable for that type of house (starter homes tend to have a higher turnover than family homes, affluent areas more so than poorer areas ) then you've probably just been unlucky and I'd just wait for another buyer.
> As far as I understand it, most of the houses that went up at the same time around me are all leasehold. >
What's the turnover of these properties like? If the turnover is reasonable for that type of house (starter homes tend to have a higher turnover than family homes, affluent areas more so than poorer areas ) then you've probably just been unlucky and I'd just wait for another buyer.
In reply to Oliver
We're meant to pay £1 a year ground rent, but in the three years we've been here, no one's asked for it and no one knows who we're meant to pay it to. So we've ignored it.
It is a trick. If you don't pay for 4 years they get to keep your house, for free, and can evict you.
Not really
We're meant to pay £1 a year ground rent, but in the three years we've been here, no one's asked for it and no one knows who we're meant to pay it to. So we've ignored it.
It is a trick. If you don't pay for 4 years they get to keep your house, for free, and can evict you.
Not really
In reply to Oliver Houston:
An absentee landlord then? Another problem with leaseholds and why I would never buy another one.
An absentee landlord then? Another problem with leaseholds and why I would never buy another one.
In reply to XXXX:
This is not the assumption you should make in this circumstance. Peppercorn rents are very rarely called in. When we deal with sales/purchases with small ground rents that have never been invoiced we usually just make an allowance for it on completion.
So if you're selling for 100k and owned the property for 5 years with a ground rent of £10 we'd generally have a 50 quid allowance so the amount we'd get from the buyer's solicitors would be £99,950 just in case it's invoiced to the new owners.
This is not the assumption you should make in this circumstance. Peppercorn rents are very rarely called in. When we deal with sales/purchases with small ground rents that have never been invoiced we usually just make an allowance for it on completion.
So if you're selling for 100k and owned the property for 5 years with a ground rent of £10 we'd generally have a 50 quid allowance so the amount we'd get from the buyer's solicitors would be £99,950 just in case it's invoiced to the new owners.
In reply to kipper12:
The value of your house is determined by demand relative to supply.
Demand is not just number of buyers, but how attractive the property is.
A leasehold makes it slightly less attractive to some buyes and cuts others out altogether. I suspect more than you'd imagine - the mentality starts when they think about flats and decide "I want a freehold". That then doesn't get recalibrated when th elease is 999 years.
The issue is whether £2k broadens the market enough to get you a sale.
Personally, in a buyers market (outside London), I'd buy the freehold and remove that whole discussion. You might still only get £110k - but you'd at least get a sale.
The value of your house is determined by demand relative to supply.
Demand is not just number of buyers, but how attractive the property is.
A leasehold makes it slightly less attractive to some buyes and cuts others out altogether. I suspect more than you'd imagine - the mentality starts when they think about flats and decide "I want a freehold". That then doesn't get recalibrated when th elease is 999 years.
The issue is whether £2k broadens the market enough to get you a sale.
Personally, in a buyers market (outside London), I'd buy the freehold and remove that whole discussion. You might still only get £110k - but you'd at least get a sale.
3
In reply to JJL:
Im a bit reluctant to drop more I droped 10k on the original asking price for the buyers that pulled out, and even offerd to cut the price again by cost of buying the lease.
Im a bit reluctant to drop more I droped 10k on the original asking price for the buyers that pulled out, and even offerd to cut the price again by cost of buying the lease.
In reply to kipper12:
People can think with their feelings when it's to do with houses, just the thought 'lease' could be enough to change how they view things. Relatively speaking 2 thousand isn't a lot for you to spend to make things easier, and you might get away with putting the price back up a bit too.
People can think with their feelings when it's to do with houses, just the thought 'lease' could be enough to change how they view things. Relatively speaking 2 thousand isn't a lot for you to spend to make things easier, and you might get away with putting the price back up a bit too.
Post edited at 13:51
In reply to kipper12:
Change your estate agent; they are a pox on the land and a bunch of avaricious, lying barstewards. Try to find one who is less dishonest if you can.
Change your estate agent; they are a pox on the land and a bunch of avaricious, lying barstewards. Try to find one who is less dishonest if you can.
1
In reply to kipper12:
Put it this way. My house is a leasehold and it's an utter bastard. The freeholders are extremely incompetent. They've lied to me about bills, they don't perform their duties as they are contractually obligated and they wouldn't even let me add numbers to my front door without their consent.
Not only that, I have a dog and I have to have their permission to keep it in my own house. It's a joke.
I wouldn't buy a leasehold again. There are a great many horror stories online too... I'm not surprised people are put off even if it will realistically (in your case) likely be ok.
Personally I'd buy the lease and whack it back to 130k with a different estate agent. Or sell it yourself via one of the many apps available now.
Put it this way. My house is a leasehold and it's an utter bastard. The freeholders are extremely incompetent. They've lied to me about bills, they don't perform their duties as they are contractually obligated and they wouldn't even let me add numbers to my front door without their consent.
Not only that, I have a dog and I have to have their permission to keep it in my own house. It's a joke.
I wouldn't buy a leasehold again. There are a great many horror stories online too... I'm not surprised people are put off even if it will realistically (in your case) likely be ok.
Personally I'd buy the lease and whack it back to 130k with a different estate agent. Or sell it yourself via one of the many apps available now.
Post edited at 14:25
1
In reply to wintertree:
This is certainly true in parts of Sheffield. My brother was recently notified that a London based firm has bought his leasehold. He researched into the company and discovered that it was a couple of graduates who had recently formed a limited company, perhaps looking for a quick buck.
They soon wrote to him advertising an 'offer' of £1,500 to purchase the leasehold. He emailed them explaining how he was willing to compromise with an offer of £900.
He received an email back within a few minutes with just the words "no not enough" and nothing else. Surprised at the unprofessional reply, he emailed back explaining how he was willing to offer £1,000. He received an email back simply stating "no".
He's not contacted them since.
> Certainly I wouldn't touch a leasehold property with a bargepole. Too many individuals and asset management firms are going around buying up leaseholds. They wouldn't do it if there was nothing in it for them, and I doubt they're taking the 999 year view.
This is certainly true in parts of Sheffield. My brother was recently notified that a London based firm has bought his leasehold. He researched into the company and discovered that it was a couple of graduates who had recently formed a limited company, perhaps looking for a quick buck.
They soon wrote to him advertising an 'offer' of £1,500 to purchase the leasehold. He emailed them explaining how he was willing to compromise with an offer of £900.
He received an email back within a few minutes with just the words "no not enough" and nothing else. Surprised at the unprofessional reply, he emailed back explaining how he was willing to offer £1,000. He received an email back simply stating "no".
He's not contacted them since.
In reply to Axel Smeets:
A disturbing thing which happened in Sheffield about fifteen or so years ago was that the Council sold a batch of leaseholds - which they'd previously owned for the long term - to private companies. And they did so without first offering the leaseholds to the homeowners involved. Not very nice behaviour.
I've never figured out the long game which these private companies are playing - but there must be *some* angle ...
> This is certainly true in parts of Sheffield. My brother was recently notified that a London based firm has bought his leasehold.
A disturbing thing which happened in Sheffield about fifteen or so years ago was that the Council sold a batch of leaseholds - which they'd previously owned for the long term - to private companies. And they did so without first offering the leaseholds to the homeowners involved. Not very nice behaviour.
I've never figured out the long game which these private companies are playing - but there must be *some* angle ...
Post edited at 15:17
1
In reply to Rob Parsons:
I imagine it's as simple as leasehold properties being less attractive to the average buyer than freehold. Particularly as freeholders can squeeze more money from leaseholders as housing becomes harder to come by.
Eventually the home owner will want to buy the freehold either when he/she buys/sells or when the company starts charging legal but silly management rates. At which point... profit.
> I've never figured out the long game which these private companies are playing - but there must be *some* angle
I imagine it's as simple as leasehold properties being less attractive to the average buyer than freehold. Particularly as freeholders can squeeze more money from leaseholders as housing becomes harder to come by.
Eventually the home owner will want to buy the freehold either when he/she buys/sells or when the company starts charging legal but silly management rates. At which point... profit.
In reply to kipper12:
My advice re the leasehold;
1) get your lawyer to write a heads of terms, a summary of it which sets out the key points.
2) Get your agent to include this in the sales particulars
3) A long leasehold is not necessarily the end of the world. It very much depends on the covenants contained within. some (many) are from a historic transfer, often municipal or state owned (Coal Board, United Utilites etc )entities unable to divest the freehold, so create a LH to get around this.
4) Often, the rent will be one peppercorn or £1 and it will often say "if demanded" which gets around the need to chase the LL to pay.
The devil is in the detail. I suspect most resi leaseholds are fairly benign, and a buyer is suitably advised should understand this. Your agent must state the tenure int he sales particulars, so if they have not - sort them out. If they have, your purchaser may well be using it as an excuse to pull out.
My advice re the leasehold;
1) get your lawyer to write a heads of terms, a summary of it which sets out the key points.
2) Get your agent to include this in the sales particulars
3) A long leasehold is not necessarily the end of the world. It very much depends on the covenants contained within. some (many) are from a historic transfer, often municipal or state owned (Coal Board, United Utilites etc )entities unable to divest the freehold, so create a LH to get around this.
4) Often, the rent will be one peppercorn or £1 and it will often say "if demanded" which gets around the need to chase the LL to pay.
The devil is in the detail. I suspect most resi leaseholds are fairly benign, and a buyer is suitably advised should understand this. Your agent must state the tenure int he sales particulars, so if they have not - sort them out. If they have, your purchaser may well be using it as an excuse to pull out.
In reply to Rob Parsons:
I've heard third hand tales of a business model that involves buying up leaseholds to large numbers of properties from organisations that were known to be ineffective at collecting the leaseholds. Then write to the owners, who are not used to receiving post about it or making payment, demanding your tuppence hapney. Some won't pay up and you escalate this into a court case. Poorly informed sticking-to-their-guns leaseholder looses, damages and costs awarded against them.
Don't know what the scope for damages are. If the people doing this are solicitors, costs are business and profit.
All third hand hearsay, and not a problem if you just pay the leasehold...
> I've never figured out the long game which these private companies are playing - but there must be *some* angle ...
I've heard third hand tales of a business model that involves buying up leaseholds to large numbers of properties from organisations that were known to be ineffective at collecting the leaseholds. Then write to the owners, who are not used to receiving post about it or making payment, demanding your tuppence hapney. Some won't pay up and you escalate this into a court case. Poorly informed sticking-to-their-guns leaseholder looses, damages and costs awarded against them.
Don't know what the scope for damages are. If the people doing this are solicitors, costs are business and profit.
All third hand hearsay, and not a problem if you just pay the leasehold...
Post edited at 18:39
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...