Surveyors don't look at lease terms when valueing - madness?

Petite_Anglaise

It's all very well saying people should just buy freehold properties!

If only they were not insanely priced.

Some people do not have any choice but to purchase a leasehold property, whether they like or not.

I am one of them, and totally agree with the OP that it's pretty ridiculous of the surveyor to use made up figures.

deFoix

AdrianC wrote: »

The surveyor is looking ONLY at the property. The paperwork is not his problem. His valuation assumes all the paperwork is in order.

I think this gets to the heart of my gripe. Many leaseholds are sold these days with less than 80 years on the lease and or with 'onerous' charges built into them. This is not 'out of order' just part of the terms of the sale.

My point is that these terms in the lease are just as instrumental to the valuation as the structural integrity of the fabric of the building so cannot be ignored, assumed or passed over like this.

Much better for the surveyor just to say "I can't make any sensible valuation regard the price of the property because I have not seen the lease terms including term, ground rent and service charges".

Guest101

Petite_Anglaise wrote: »

It's all very well saying people should just buy freehold properties!

If only they were not insanely priced.

Some people do not have any choice but to purchase a leasehold property, whether they like or not. - Really someone holds a gun to their head?

I am one of them, and totally agree with the OP that it's pretty ridiculous of the surveyor to use made up figures.

That's not what I'm saying - I'm saying if someone doesn't understand how property works, they shouldn't buy it.

shortcrust

AdrianC wrote: »

Seems very simple to me. The surveyor is looking ONLY at the property. The paperwork is not his problem.

Boler1985 wrote: »

I think this gets to the heart of my gripe.

?!?!?

It's like complaining that your dentist doesn't also do your eye test. They're different jobs. You need a solicited to be certain that the legal stuff is fully understood.

AnotherJoe

shortcrust wrote: »

?!?!?

It's like complaining that your dentist doesn't also do your eye test. They're different jobs. You need a solicited to be certain that the legal stuff is fully understood.

I dont buy this analogy. The surveyor is doing a valuation. The length of the lease can be absolutely key to the valuation. To ignore that on a leasehold property invalidates it just as much as if, on a house, the valuer had ignored how many bedrooms bathrooms living rooms the property had.

AdrianC

Boler1985 wrote: »

I think this gets to the heart of my gripe. Many leaseholds are sold these days with less than 80 years on the lease and or with 'onerous' charges built into them. This is not 'out of order' just part of the terms of the sale.

My point is that these terms in the lease are just as instrumental to the valuation as the structural integrity of the fabric of the building so cannot be ignored, assumed or passed over like this.

Much better for the surveyor just to say "I can't make any sensible valuation regard the price of the property because I have not seen the lease terms including term, ground rent and service charges".

So, iyho, the surveyor needs to be an expert in the legals, as well as the building itself? How much else of the solicitor's job do you want him to do?

What about people who aren't having a survey done? Do they not need the lease checking? Or would you have the lease checked twice, by surveyor AND solicitor?

davidmcn

Boler1985 wrote: »

Much better for the surveyor just to say "I can't make any sensible valuation regard the price of the property because I have not seen the lease terms including term, ground rent and service charges".

In which case you're then just delaying the valuation to an even later stage in the process, because you'd need to wait for your solicitor to complete their due diligence before instructing the surveyor to go out.

But 90% of the time those assumptions are going to be fine, so why not get the bulk of the job over with and adjust the valuation afterwards if something odd/onerous crops up?

kingstreet

How would the surveyor know the property is leasehold?

The potential purchaser/person instructing the surveyor should establish the remaining lease term and other issues and inform the surveyor ahead of the inspection.

Just as they would inform the surveyor if they wanted specific attention paid to a particular feature, such as the roof/chimney.

[Deleted User]

I'm surprised any lender would accept this little / no lease information tbh because if they had to reposesss a property , the value of a 64 yr lease with £8k service charges as an example will be severely less attractive and less valuable should they need to offload the property and recover their costs. ( yes I know they can go after the mortagee but what if the mortgagee then says ' ere I paid your surveyor for an accurate valuation and you over valued it because they didnt get the correct lease details so i'm not paying )

All these people who think solicitors are a safeguard aswell need a reality check , mine just told me there wasnt anything out the ordinary in the Lease , no detail, no responsibilities on either side, nothing.

Not everyone works for the industry they have to deal with and therefore dont have detailed knowledge.

The bigest mistake people make is assuming that paying for professional services will give them a professsional service with their needs in mind so they understand exactly what they are taking on.

AdrianC

BBH123 wrote: »

I'm surprised any lender would accept this little / no lease information

They don't. The solicitor acts for them, too.