Leaseholds

Wickedkitten

Thrugelmir wrote: »

The service charge on a leasehold property includes all repairs and maintenance to all communal parts of the building and shared facilities such as gardens, car parking and roads.

So even if you live in a ground floor flat you will contribute the maintance of the roof. You do need to look into this type of issue when buying leasehold as you may find yourself liable to a sizable service charge even though you only lived in a property a short period of time. A good managing agent will make provision for exceptional one off costs every year so that a reserve is created to fund this type of expenditure.

I was actually reading somewhere on MSE about someone losing the plot because the management company did exactly that and then stuck a leaflet through everyone's door saying that they needed to stump up over 1k in 28 days or some bull, plus you never know when they will just decide they want to raise the service charge.

I have seen some freehold flats, but I heard that mortgage companies usually won't lend on them.

brixham

My flat owns the freehold of the building which has another flat below it (does that make sense?) Two flats, one building, top flat owns freehold bottom flat is leasehold.
As mine is classed as a freehold flat I was more limited in the choice of mortgages but was still able to get a good deal with a high street lender.
Looking forward to getting my hands on downstairs when their lease runs out in around 942 years time !

sooz

I can see why a developer would make their houses leasehold - a great way to claw back more money.
I meant I couldn't see the point in owning one

brixham...you should put your countdown on your sig :cool:

Wickedkitten

sooz wrote: »

I can see why a developer would make their houses leasehold - a great way to claw back more money.
I meant I couldn't see the point in owning one

brixham...you should put your countdown on your sig :cool:

I can't see the point in owning a leasehold full stop, but thats just me.

Robert_Sterling_3

sooz wrote: »

flats generally have to be leasehold
can't see the point of a leasehold house though

I think the Duke of Westminster might be able to explain it to you.
I think he holds the freehold of a lot of land and property in London.

Richard_Webster

My flat owns the freehold of the building which has another flat below it (does that make sense?) Two flats, one building, top flat owns freehold bottom flat is leasehold.
As mine is classed as a freehold flat I was more limited in the choice of mortgages but was still able to get a good deal with a high street lender.

It isn't a pure freehold flat - that's where your flat and any other flats have separate freehold titles.

This situation is acceptable to most mortgage lenders and is catered for in 5.5.3 of the CML Lenders' handbook:

5.5.3 Unless we indicate to the contrary (see part 2), we have no objection to a security which comprises a building converted into not more than four flats where the borrower occupies one of those flats and the borrower or another flat owner also owns the freehold of the building and the other flats are subject to long leases.

Trouble is that a lot of mortgage brokers etc don't understand this and get all confused and then lenders end up rejecting a mortgage application because they think it really is a freehold flat!