Freeholder not playing ball on garden transfer..

HouseBuyer77

FH has near enough said to me - your neighbours look like they have dosh, we're gonna go after them for it.

FH has asset your neighbours want, FH reckons they'll pay more for it so he's trying to get more than currently offered. Perhaps after a few months he'll capitulate, or perhaps your neighbours will. Doesn't really matter what the jusitification for price is on either side. 'I reckon he'll pay more, looks like he can afford it' is a good a reason as any.

tizzle6560

HouseBuyer77 wrote: »

FH has asset your neighbours want, FH reckons they'll pay more for it so he's trying to get more than currently offered. Perhaps after a few months he'll capitulate, or perhaps your neighbours will. Doesn't really matter what the jusitification for price is on either side. 'I reckon he'll pay more, looks like he can afford it' is a good a reason as any.

Pretty much, yes

marksoton

tizzle6560 wrote: »

And what's the downfall of him selling said land, if they now have admitted that it wouldn't really affect the overall value of the FH?

Nothing. At the price HE wants.

You seem to think the price you "agreed" with your neighbour has relevance.It doesn't. Not a single bit.

eddddy

The way land sales like this are normally negotiated (and the way your freeholder is probably looking at it) is as follows:

- Neighbours house is currently worth, say, £500k
- Neighbours house with larger garden is worth, say, £550k

- So initial asking price for land is £50k.
(Final price is dependent on who is more desperate and/or who negotiates best.)


The £50k (or whatever final price) needs to be split between you (leaseholder) and the freeholder.

Again it's down to negotiation - it could be 50% each, 90% vs 10%, or 10% vs 90%.
(Again the final split is dependent on who is more desperate and/or who negotiates best. If you can't agree, the land can't be sold.)

Freecall

eddddy has it about right.

There are three parties to this deal and each holds something of value :

- You have your rights under the lease
- The freeholder has his rights of land ownership
- Your neighbour has money

If you can all come to an arrangement under which you all agree to reorganise these things of value then great, everyone is happy.

This is an all-or-nothing situation though, any one of you can simply say ‘no’ and that is the end of that.

Cakeguts

tizzle6560 wrote: »

Not once did I say they should 'give it away'.. And what is it they say about sarcasm being..?

Fact is - Neighbours want to buy it for a substantial amount, Freeholder has admitted he is willing to sell it to them but is charging an absurd amount of money, based on a justification that is not even a valid argument. FH has near enough said to me - your neighbours look like they have dosh, we're gonna go after them for it.

Freeholder can sell HIS freehold land for as much as he wants. Neighbour doesn't have to agree to this price. Your price has got nothing to do with it. You can't sell the freehold because you don't own it. So if neighbour wants this piece of land they have to pay the owner the freeholder what the freeholder is asking if not then they aren't going to get it. You have no say in what the freeholder wants for HIS land.

Neighbour has decided that the land isn't worth to him what the freeholder wants for it? If so then this bit of garden will stay as part of your lease and there is nothing that you can do about it.

camptownraces

Backland development?

If your property was in our part of the world, a freeholder would hold out for a developer's offer any day of the week. (Obviously without divulging this possibility to the leaseholder.)

The land would be much devalued by a chunk being sold to people at the back.

G_M

bored now.

there's nothing new being said and noting new that can be said.

Cakeguts

G_M wrote: »

bored now.

there's nothing new being said and noting new that can be said.

I think it is quite interesting from the point of view of how some people think. I would imagine that it is quite unusual for someone to think that they can sell something that they don't own just because they have no use for it? Not only that but they negotiated a price to sell what they didn't own and are now upset because the owner doesn't agree with this price? I would think that anyone who owned something that someone else had negotiated a price on to sell would be a bit annoyed. I hope that the "absurd" price compensates for the annoyance of having to deal with someone who thinks that they can sell something that doesn't belong to them just because they don't want to deal with it anymore.