HELP ME! Please, Though it was freehold but is actually leasehold

Richard_Webster

Personally, Leasehold houses are more difficult to sell than Freehold ones

They may be more difficult to sell, largely because people know of people who have had trouble with leasehold flats and fight shy of leasehold for that reason. In places where there are lots of leasehold houses it isn't so much of an issue. Round my way estate agents don't make any distinction when valuing freehold or very long leasehold.

because you don't own the land it sits on

Common misunderstanding. You will own the house and the land it sits on but only for the next 900 or so years.

AMILLIONDOLLARS

Quote:
because you don't own the land it sits on
Common misunderstanding. You will own the house and the land it sits on but only for the next 900 or so years.

I stand corrected:D

That's why it will be harder to sell, unless, as you say, most of the surrounding houses are in the same situation.

But put like that, we don't own anything at all, we are just buying the right to live in a particular property, as we can't take it with us when we go:rotfl:

AMD

JoolzS

A 999 year lease is pretty much the same as owning a property freehold. Don't worry about it.

beaujolais-nouveau wrote: »

No, it isn't.

Yes it is. If I'm wrong - please explain the differences.

Julie

Richard_Webster

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicstick86
I think most of you have reassured me its still ok to carry on with the sale so THANKS :-)

Well, I wouldn't, until I knew what the service charges were; the insurance charges; whether or not the freeholder could demand unlimited amounts on account, as "indemnity fund" or "reserve fund".

Of course there are differences, but to put the matter in simple layman's terms it isn't that far off to say there isn't a lot of difference between a long leasehold house and a freehold.

A lot of solicitors charge extra for "leasehold" regardless or whether it is a house or a flat. I generally charge significantly more for flats but charge very little, if anything, more for leasehold houses

There is a lot more difference between the legal complications involved with a flat (service charges, maintenance arrangements, etc) and those with a typical long leasehold house, than there is between such a leasehold house and a freehold house.. There are a few exceptions, e.g modern long leasehold houses on marina developments where there are service charges related to the upkeep of the marina.

ILW

Jules100 wrote: »

Nearly all houses in London for example are leasehold.
.

No they are not. Where did you get that from.

OptimisticSaver

In my case, my neighbour and I have 2 leases on 1 freehold property. The freeholder is responsible for the shell of the property and leaseholders for the internal upkeep. With freeholds, you are liable for payments of all repairs etc whereas a lease allows you to share communal costs.. Alot of houses in London are Leasehold and you normally have the option to either buy the freehold or a share of freehold if you are a small number of flats.

Blocks of flats are all leasehold and come with very large service charge to clean and maintain communal areas / lifts etc... Whereas if its a converted building, the service charge is normally inclusive of repairs and then divided by number of units.

Hope thats handy!