new build off the plan but lease start from 2011!

Hoploz

Bear in mind that the 10 years is from the date on the lease .... Not 2016 but 2011!!

We had this in my mums flat. She was first to buy on 30th January 2010 - site only just completed.

Lease stated it would increase after 5 years, a bit like you've talked about here. We queried this when we had notification of the increase in 2013/4 but indeed it was correct - the lease was dated 1st January 2009 - before the flats were actually built! And the increase indeed happened accordingly, actually only 4 years after occupation.

Therefore your 10 years would arrive in 2021, only 5 years away.

I cannot offer advice as we were caught out ourselves but please do get clarification so you know what to expect.

Freecall

Having lease start dates earlier than the conveyance date for the initial leaseholder is perfectly normal, in fact it is almost always the case (although 5 years is quite a bit).

If it was not, freeholders would end up with a block where the leases all run between different start and end dates which would make the administration more complex.

ERICS_MUM

You don't mention management and service fees - are they covered in any of the documentation ?

I really really think you should choose an independent solicitor, it is SO important to get it right, especially with leasehold properties which are/can be more complex than freehold and certainly cost more over the duration.

nish1013

ERICS_MUM wrote: »

You don't mention management and service fees - are they covered in any of the documentation ?

I really really think you should choose an independent solicitor, it is SO important to get it right, especially with leasehold properties which are/can be more complex than freehold and certainly cost more over the duration.

Thank you. Service Charge £1,080.72 p/a

Niv

why does anyone buy at flat with terms like that!

JP08

These lease terms where the rental doubles every 10 years always look really scary. It actually corresponds to an inflation rate of 8% - which sounds high by todays standards but round about the average for the last 100 years.

Hoploz

Freecall wrote: »

Having lease start dates earlier than the conveyance date for the initial leaseholder is perfectly normal, in fact it is almost always the case (although 5 years is quite a bit).

If it was not, freeholders would end up with a block where the leases all run between different start and end dates which would make the administration more complex.

But these leases (my mum's I mentioned and the OP's) are dated before the blocks were actually built! If the leases all ran from when it was built, or even from when first occupied, that would surely be more logical than dating a lease in OP's case dated five years before the block existed.

nish1013

You mean its sounds right ?

nish1013

Agreed. This was what I raised with solicitors too. In reality I'm going to get a 120 years lease which will up for £500 after 5 years .

bod1467

As per post #2, I'd be more concerned about the veracity with which the solicitor is checking information ... the wording and the table are entirely at odds with each other. The table shows the maximum rent reached after 80 years; the wording suggests it is reached after 40 years.