Developer now informed us our house is leasehold rather than freehold

G_M

There is no way this could be freehold.

In simple terms, a freeholder owns the land and everything on it.

Where there is a block of flats, the flat owners cannot (individually) own their flats on a freehold basis because other people's flats are also built on the same bit of land, so each flat is leasehold, with the freehold being owned seperately (either by a 3rd party, or perhaps jointly by several people who may or may not also own leases to the flats)

In your case, you own something (coach house) built on a pice of land on which something else is built (bin store). So just as with flats, your coach house must be leasehold.

Hence also the ground rent.

Now, the developer may choose to sell the freehold seperately, and may indeed offer to sell it to you. In that case you would own
a) the leasehold coach house AND
b) the freehold to the whole plot.

jjlandlord

Plainly, leaseholds are a remnant of the past and should be abolished.

getmore4less

There is a thing called a flying freehold.

Very common on older terraced houses with access passages wher e one of them has a room over the passage.

the space underneath has things like access rights for all the other houses.

These coach houses on new builds are just ther to use up the space that must be provided for parking access and bins.

in the old days the developers would not bother as no one would touch them, now they find they can squeese a bit more as someone will buy them.

Bit like integral garages and the move to 3 story town houses get more plots on the same space.

moneyistooshorttomention

G_M wrote: »

There is no way this could be freehold.

In simple terms, a freeholder owns the land and everything on it.

Where there is a block of flats, the flat owners cannot (individually) own their flats on a freehold basis because other people's flats are also built on the same bit of land, so each flat is leasehold, with the freehold being owned seperately (either by a 3rd party, or perhaps jointly by several people who may or may not also own leases to the flats)

In your case, you own something (coach house) built on a pice of land on which something else is built (bin store). So just as with flats, your coach house must be leasehold.

Hence also the ground rent.

Now, the developer may choose to sell the freehold seperately, and may indeed offer to sell it to you. In that case you would own
a) the leasehold coach house AND
b) the freehold to the whole plot.

I think that's put it quite clearly for OP. Put like that - then its logical it would indeed be leasehold (rather than freehold) - whatever the builder had said it was originally.

I guess that leaves 2 options:

1, - either ask to buy that "bin store" in effect (ie the freehold to the plot) and point out that, due to their error on this, you don't expect to pay much for it

2. - forget the whole idea, try not to think how much of your money that builder has wasted by not telling you in the first place it was leasehold, find somewhere else to buy instead.

Personally, I would be wondering if the builder had known full well at the outset that this place is leasehold and deliberately lied to state it was freehold. Followed by planning on telling another lie and stating "Oh...whoops....gov...I made an error. Oh silly me!" but they'd been deliberately intending to sell the place for a freehold price, rather than a leasehold price and hope to "catch someone" with it.

I'm coming round to the view it would be best to forget the place and find another one - but then I don't think coach houses are a good idea anyway.

NB; I have an idea that there are likely to be insurance problems with coach houses (ie having to pay more for that sort of set-up than for a proper house iyswim). I may be wrong on this - but expect G_M will know the answer to that...

jjlandlord

In England the overwhelming majority of flats are leasehold. That's really the only explanation to give OP.

It does not have to be. There are very few leaseholds in Scotland and many countries do not have any at all.

[Deleted User]

The Leasehold issue isn't as much as a problem as the fact that it is a coach house over a storage area that will not be well insulated, and accessible at all hours. You won't notice the effects now but you will the first winter.

Coach house construction really is a bad idea for living in.

moneyistooshorttomention

deannatrois wrote: »

The Leasehold issue isn't as much as a problem as the fact that it is a coach house over a storage area that will not be well insulated, and accessible at all hours. You won't notice the effects now but you will the first winter.

Coach house construction really is a bad idea for living in.

True and that's one of the reasons I wouldn't want one personally.

Also - I've read quite a few accounts of other peoples cars creating noise underneath the coach house (don't know if this would be the case for this particular one?). I would also expect car fumes rising up through garage roof/up through floor of my place - unless it was darn well-built.

I agree with the cynical conclusion as to why coach houses are being built these days (ie there has to be garage space etc and the builder has decided to try and make some extra money by shoving a home on top of it).

PixelPound

Surely a coach house is better off being a leasehold. Although OP wants a freehold, there are a lot of additional cost implications (even if we ignore the cost of buying the freehold instead of leasehold) such as ongoing maintenance of the binstore and carports, as the other carport will be a leasehold.

TBeckett100

Hmm may pong a bit in summer and in winter the local kids will hang out. Magnet for drug users, homeless, ladies of the night.

Personally, I wouldn't

stator

It's entirely possible they could sell it as a freehold but with covenants attached regarding the bin store.

However personally I would use this as an excuse to withdraw and demand your money back.