Leasehold property with around 40 years left on EXTENDED 50 year lease-looking for advice

topoftherock

Cakeguts wrote: »

You can probably persuade him then that it isn't actually really worth all the stress of doing it. What he is going to finish up with after all the expense and stress is a house that is worth next to nothing with lots of things needing doing to it which will have to be sold if he needs care in a care home. It would be a lot simpler to save the money needed to buy the freehold or even to enjoy spending it because there is a high posibility due to the cost of care home fees that there won't be anything left from the house sale to pass onto his children. Plus he won't have to go through the stress of selling the home to pay for care if he needs it and seeing the house that he so carefully spent time and money buying being sold again.


If the lease is longer than you think he is going to live for then it is probably better to let it remain leasehold because it will be possible for him to continue to live there. The chances are that he won't be able to pass it on anyway.

Hi Cakeguts,
Thanks for your reply. If my father fell ill, I would care for him full time. Therefore, we don't have to consider expensive care fees, thank god.

Yes, the lease will be longer than he will live, so at least he will be able to live in the house until he passes away. When you say "The chances are that he won't be able to pass it on anyway", how is that? I mean, it was passed onto my father after my grandmother passed away (i.e when the new 50 year lease started, it was in my grandmother's name. She passed away around 6 months later, and then it was transferred to my father).

In summary, he is determined to buy the freehold and this is all he wants to do. Every penny he gets from his pension, is for this freehold.

topoftherock

Hoploz wrote: »

That's right, hence asking in my first reply what the benefit is of buying the freehold. Future plans for the long term make all the difference.

If the plan is to sell and profit from the house then it's no good with this type of leasehold. But if it's to live in and that's all, there's no point spending all that. It can still be inherited and enjoyed for years to come and the likelihood is the next owner in the family can renew the lease for relatively small money again when it comes up for another 50 years

Hi Hoploz, thanks for your message. Would it be possible to extend this lease again in 2060? The reason I ask is because this is already an extended 50 year lease (from the original 99 year lease).

topoftherock

Sunny_Intervals wrote: »

The Government is currently considering making massive changes to how leasehold works, including the costs involved in extending leases/buying the freehold. They're currently collecting evidence for an inquiry into leasehold reform. Unless you're desperate to make a decision now, it's worth waiting a few months to see what they come up with.

Hi Sunny Intervals, thanks for the reply. After reading the proposed changes, it seems that new rules will be in place by the summer of 2019. So let's hope, it's fairer for all leaseholders!

topoftherock

Cakeguts wrote: »

That probably won't make any difference in this situation because even if they buy the freehold the house will probably need to be sold to pay for care. In a situation like that however little it costs to buy the freehold will be just the same as keeping the money in a savings account.


If the lease was owned by a much younger person then that might make sense but for an older person as long as the lease is longer than they are expecting to live for there is no point in buying the freehold and there will be costs involved.

Hi Cakeguts,
Thanks for the reply. In our situation, buying the freehold remains the number 1 priority. Moreover, if my father became ill, I would care for him on a full-time basis.

Hoploz

Presumably the cost of the freehold is so high because of the regularity of the lease renewals. The amount payable depends on the loss to the existing freeholder, and in this case they're getting a payout more often than with most leases. You may find the new regs when they come in reduce this a lot, so wait.

topoftherock

Hoploz wrote: »

Presumably the cost of the freehold is so high because of the regularity of the lease renewals. The amount payable depends on the loss to the existing freeholder, and in this case they're getting a payout more often than with most leases. You may find the new regs when they come in reduce this a lot, so wait.

Hi Hoploz, many thanks for your reply. Yes, I think this is the best option. It’s looking promising, so fingers crossed.