Major issue selling our home in the lake district.

Gatecrasher93

Ok this is complicated.
In march 17 we decided to sell our shared ownership home 75% owned ( 25% is in trust) near Keswick.
The housing association allocated the house to a local couple but it soon became apparent that there was a major problem getting a mortgage on these properties.
The houses are freehold 75% shared with no rent to pay on the 25% which is held in trust but doesn't really exist.
The residents have always been led to believe the houses have a very strict local occupancy clause attached but they do not have a S106.
As it stands today there isnt one mortgage company will touch them and none of the 14 residents are able to move or remortgage.
The houses are valued at £132,000 for 75% which is very very cheap for this area.
The housing association have been advised to change the contracts to leasehold and add a s106 to solve the issue but if there is no S106 in place already why are the house values so low.
Can a house be local occupancy without a s106?
Can the association legally restrict the price of the property?
Are the restrictions legal the association are enforcing?
Any help and advise will be very much appreciated, we have been through hell with this and have actually just lost our new house and around £5000 in lost deposits and fees and can no longer afford further legal costs.

Davesnave

Presumably, local solicitors will come across restricted housing frequently in places like the Lake District, so what does yours say in response to the questions you are asking here?

It's certainly possible for a property to be local occupancy without a s106, as many agriculturally tied houses have such clauses in their planning permissions, drafted long before s106 agreements. Lenders aren't very keen on those either, so they're usually sold to cash buyers.

Gatecrasher93

Im waiting to here back from solicitors as the s106 only came up yesterday.
These houses were built in around 1994 and s106 came into effect in 1990.
So im not sure why they wouldn't have that in place already.
These houses are supposed to be for first time buyers but its also come to light that the last house sold here a few years ago was a cash buyer.
The committee have refused to allow me to sell to a cash buyer and have refused to hold a residents meeting on several occasions now and we have 14 houses here and we are all in the same boat.

moneyistooshorttomention

When you say "the committee have refused to allow us to hold a meeting" - I'm confused.

They can't physically stop you "holding a meeting". You choose either a large sitting room in someone's house/a church hall or room above a pub and hold a meeting, elect a chairperson, take minutes, send those minutes to the Housing Association and the local media.

It's up to them (ie the HA) if they decide to boycott the meeting - and you "get very vocal" about it in the press if they do.

All 14 houses need to stick together very firmly on this.

BTW - what is the attitude of your local Community Council/Town Council/City Council (delete as applicable) about this?

Davesnave

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

It's up to them (ie the HA) if they decide to boycott the meeting - and you "get very vocal" about it in the press if they do.

All 14 houses need to stick together very firmly on this.

Getting very vocal in the press is your answer to many things, but people whose houses are blighted in some way don't usually want to shout it to the world, because mud sticks, even after issues have been solved/dealt with.

I have brief experience of living on an estate hit by serious subsidence issues to go on here.


But yes, the residents need to form a group of some kind so that this matter can be properly addressed, possibly contacting the council or their MP in a quiet way, if necessary, as surely no one intends the houses to be unsaleable.

moneyistooshorttomention

It's a value judgement sometimes - whether to "scream to the rooftops" about something that is proving a major blight to one's home and figure out what the chances are that the issue will be successfully resolved and then prove to have a been a "9 days wonder - next week's chip papers" in time to be able to sell the house as totally normal in all respects (ie because it now is normal)

A major issue was there re my last house and I thought "Can this be solved in time for it to be all 'done and dusted' before whatever future time I sell this house finally"?

I decided to take my chances as to whether "screaming my head off" would mean "Everyone would know - and it still wouldnt have been resolved" on the one hand or "Everyone would know - and it doesnt matter - because 'screaming' worked and it was resolved".

It was a value judgement - and I rated the odds as good that 'screaming' would work & it would be resolved. It did work - the issue was resolved - and, when I came to sell my house some while later it was "past history/forgotten about/over & finished with".

Come to think of it - I had to "scream" twice about issues that would have a major effect on my house value and did so both times - successfully.

ACG

If you own the freehold of your flat, how can anyone stop you selling the property to a cash buyer?

Assuming they can stop it and there is no lease in place meaning the property is not mortgageable, your property is actually worthless as nobody can buy it.

As has been said, you all need to get together and force the issue to be resolved.