Whole end of terrace house but only share of freehold?

Dreddnarz

http://www.pedderproperty.com/Property/Residential/for-sale/London/West-Norwood/Rommany-Road/PWS24798.aspx

Going to see this place on Saturday, I'm unsure how this can be a shared freehold property when it is a full house.
I rang the estate agent to clarify but they said they are going to have to ask the vendor for more information.

Anyone ever seen anything like that? I'm assuming it's a communication mistake, I was under the impression it's only when you have multiple flats in one building that a freehold share situation can occur.

Fire_Fox

Gorgeous house and garden! The house looks double fronted but there is only one bedroom? Looking at the floorplan what is to the rear? Houses like that are not one room deep with only a garden to the side.

Dreddnarz

Fire_Fox wrote: »

Gorgeous house and garden!

TINY house and garden (only 45 SQM)!
But yes it does look lovely.

Fire_Fox

Sorry I edited my last post. IMO it's share of freehold because there is something else to the rear sharing the same roof, like two maisonettes.

Wobblydeb

Someone may have owned the entire terrace at one point, and sold the properties leasehold. Hence subsequent share of freehold if a group of properties got together.

Had something similar-ish in my old place. 9 terraced houses with a communal back garden owned by a trust who also still owned and rented a couple of the properties.

Dreddnarz

Here is an ariel view on bing maps:
http://binged.it/Sad43N

The house is indeed that small, nothing to the rear sharing the roof.

Dreddnarz

Wobblydeb wrote: »

Someone may have owned the entire terrace at one point, and sold the properties leasehold. Hence subsequent share of freehold if a group of properties got together.

Had something similar-ish in my old place. 9 terraced houses with a communal back garden owned by a trust who also still owned and rented a couple of the properties.

In that sort of situation would there even be any communal area part freehold type responsibilities as there are with the normal 'flats in a converted house' share of freehold situation?

I assume as all the terraces are separate you would as a leaseholder and part freeholder be only responsible for your own house.

Fire_Fox

Dreddnarz wrote: »

In that sort of situation would there even be any communal area part freehold type responsibilities as there are with the normal 'flats in a converted house' share of freehold situation?

I assume as all the terraces are separate you would as a leaseholder and part freeholder be only responsible for your own house.

Perhaps the part between the rear of the house and the fence, that is not marked on the floorplan. It's possible you all have to have your roofs done together, but that is less likely. You need to ask the estate agent this, as well as the length of the lease, don't assume anything. You may need communal buildings insurance.

Wobblydeb

Dreddnarz wrote: »

In that sort of situation would there even be any communal area part freehold type responsibilities as there are with the normal 'flats in a converted house' share of freehold situation?

I assume as all the terraces are separate you would as a leaseholder and part freeholder be only responsible for your own house.

Not sure as I've never been in a share of freehold situation, whether it changes the workings of the original leases. Perhaps someone with more experience may be along soon?

Personally I would be watching out for common responsibility for drainage / roof and suchlike. Not sure how it impacts party wall agreements either, if you might want to do work in the loft space. The key is to get your solicitor to fully explain any rights and obligations contained in the lease and share of freehold documents.

Dreddnarz

Wobblydeb wrote: »

Personally I would be watching out for common responsibility for drainage / roof and suchlike. Not sure how it impacts party wall agreements either, if you might want to do work in the loft space. The key is to get your solicitor to fully explain any rights and obligations contained in the lease and share of freehold documents.

Yeah, if we like the property there will be many questions asked of the current owners!

As far as I was aware, if you have full vertical separation you would either be full freehold or full leasehold.

Until we get some more information from the vendor I think this house freehold situation will remain a bit of a conundrum to work out...

Fire_Fox

Wobblydeb wrote: »

Not sure as I've never been in a share of freehold situation, whether it changes the workings of the original leases. Perhaps someone with more experience may be along soon?

Personally I would be watching out for common responsibility for drainage / roof and suchlike. Not sure how it impacts party wall agreements either, if you might want to do work in the loft space. The key is to get your solicitor to fully explain any rights and obligations contained in the lease and share of freehold documents.

AFAIK unless the lease is varied, the original covenants stand. BUT as freeholders you don't have to act upon them, you don't have to charge yourselves money or enforce any breaches. It's not like the leaseholders are going to take the freeholders to the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal because they are not happy with the decisions made! http://www.lease-advice.org/publications/

Dreddnarz wrote: »

Yeah, if we like the property there will be many questions asked of the current owners!

As far as I was aware, if you have full vertical separation you would either be full freehold or full leasehold.

Until we get some more information from the vendor I think this house freehold situation will remain a bit of a conundrum to work out...

Share of freehold IS full leasehold, you would have a long lease which you are named on AND you would be named on the separate freehold title OR you would be a partner in the company that owns the freehold title. Two separate legal documents, you are a leaseholder and you are a freeholder.