Sub-lease question (told house was Freehold)

mistrihelen

I am trying to buy a house for the first time. It all went horribly wrong with one property, so we are trying again with a second.

Now another problem - we've only just been given the HIP (after paying for a valuation, getting the mortgage done, etc).

We were explicitly told by the EA that the house was freehold, but the HIP includes information on TWO leases.

In 2004 the current owners bought the main lease, and also the sub-lease. I don't understand why they would buy both at the same time - any ideas?

What's also confusing is that in the first part of the HIP the owners say it's freehold and that they've only been there since 2007.

I'm rather gutted as I wanted a freehold property and we'd have to rethink buying it if it's leasehold. Also, I've been looking up sub-leases but it's rather confusing and I still don't get why someone would buy the lease and a sub-lease at the same time.

Can anyone help out a rather befuddled first-time buyer?

jessbob

As you state that the HIP info also states 'freehold' - maybe the sellers also purchased the freehold interest in the property.

\Have another look at the Home Information Pack. If the sellers are registered as owners of the freehold and leasehold titles, then you can basically consider the property to be freehold, as you will be buying both the titles to the property.

If you are still unsure, give your Solicitor a ring to discuss.

Let me know what your find out;)

mistrihelen

Thanks - there is no info on the freehold title in the HIP though, it is simply a box they've ticked.

But I'll hope you're right. I'd rather look silly and worry for nothing than find out it is leasehold