Missold a freehold

[Deleted User]

I think it would be worth talking through your options with your mortgage lender to see what would be the best in the short and longer term.

You may have the choice of saving up for the lease extension yourself, or of adding it to your mortgage.

You could also ask exactly how the timing of your lease extension would affect their valuation at remortgage time, and how that in turn would affect the interest rates you'd be offered.

Thrugelmir

Nobbie1967 wrote: »

Vect wrote: »

I used a broker who is an extension of the estate agent./QUOTE]

I wonder if the broker steered you towards a provider who wouldn't have a problem with the short lease so that you weren't alerted to this issue?

Doesn't appear as if anyone did anything wrong and nothing was hidden during the process.

marksoton

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Nobbie1967 wrote: »

Doesn't appear as if anyone did anything wrong and nothing was hidden during the process.

Whilst technically true this sort of case only strengthens the argument for not using EA additional services.

I know it's a much wider argument than this thread but the conflict of interests and pressure put on particularly FTB's shouldn't even be allowed to exist.

dancingfairy

I happen to know that lease length is an important thing to best in mind but there are a million and one things about buying property that I don't know never having done it before so I can understand the situation the op is in and expecting the experts to make him aware of things like this.
Op it sounds like a horrible situation and you should definitely look at complaining. I believe you can't apply for a lease extension until you have owned the property for 2 years.
Df

Doozergirl

Nobbie1967 wrote: »

Vect wrote: »

I used a broker who is an extension of the estate agent./QUOTE]

I wonder if the broker steered you towards a provider who wouldn't have a problem with the short lease so that you weren't alerted to this issue?

Exactly what I asked earlier. They've brushed it under the carpet and I'd be prettty mad woth them as well. They would know it was an issue.

I think the solicitor is in trouble for not pointing this out. I'd speak to the SRA. The lease extension is a large cost and there is no escaping the choice of either that large cost or heavy depreciation in the future.

OP, I don't blame you at all. Leasehold is a nightmare to negotiate around and if you don't know something like that (why would you, really?) then you just don't know.

Doozergirl

dancingfairy wrote: »

I happen to know that lease length is an important thing to best in mind but there are a million and one things about buying property that I don't know never having done it before so I can understand the situation the op is in and expecting the experts to make him aware of things like this.
Op it sounds like a horrible situation and you should definitely look at complaining. I believe you can't apply for a lease extension until you have owned the property for 2 years.
Df

You can apply before 2 years and most freeholders will oblige (unless the lease was in the sweet spot for a freeholder between 80-82 years, where they would have a vested interest in waiting)

You can't force a freeholder to extend before 2 years, that's all.

davidmcn

Doozergirl wrote: »

I'd speak to the SRA.

Don't think it has anything to do with the SRA, at worst it's a negligence claim against the solicitors. As suggested above, the OP may wish to seek independent advice about whether and how to pursue it.

TBagpuss

Well, in the first instance it would be a complaint to the solicitor or conveyancer. It only becomes a claim if they are not able to address the complaint.

It may be that if OP makes a complaint the solicitor will be able to show that he was, in fact, given the appropriate advice, in which case there would be no negligence.

It may be that they will accept that he was given poor service and will offer something to address that. You don't yet now what it would actually cost to extend the lease. You knew there was a lease, so I don't think you could realisticly expect the solicitors to pay the full cost - at most I think you might be able to argue you didn't know the flat wasn't in the 'sweet spot' and that extenstion would therefore be a bit more expensive - on the figures it suggests that you might end up paying £7K instead of £2K so your possible loss is £5K. Against that, you'd need to offset the lower price you paid as against what would have been reasonble with a longer lease - presumably the valuation report was on the basis of the short lease.

Have you made any enquiries to establish what the property would be worth with a longer lease?

movilogo

Why it takes more money to extend a lease if less amount of time remaining?

The whole idea of leasehold sounds like a form of slavery! In Scotland it doesn't exist. England should change its laws.

G_M

movilogo wrote: »

Why it takes more money to extend a lease if less amount of time remaining?

Depends how many additional years occupancy you are buying.

Assuming you are extending to a new 99 year lease:
a) if the current years remaining is 60, you are buying an extra 39 years
b) if the current years remaining is 50, you are buying an extra 49 years

So b) costs more than a).

Of course, if you have 50 years remaining (as b) above) but choose to extend the lease to 60 years (though goodness knows why), you'd be buying an extra 10 years which would cost less than a) above