What's the point of buying a Leasehold property?

user1977

diystarter7 said:

Woolsery said:

diystarter7 said:

A lot of inaccurate info here re the lenght of leases.
It's not 999 years as posted by some but 125 years, in London it is on apartments built 20/30/35 years ago

In central london they were 999 years but the majority in london are 125 years.

The country extends beyond London. My info was 100% accurate, relating to a house built in 1898 and rebuilt in 1948. It was in Bath; like many others built on land owned by a charitable trust. I believe there are thousands of older leasehold houses in the NW around Manchester.

Of course, more modern leases are different and the problems with 'rocketing costs' are well documented. You can't paint the two things with the same brush.

the vast majority of people would run a mile form a leasehold house

Without knowing what the lease says? Many are ultra-long leases and utterly benign. Would be daft to run away from them.

Section62

diystarter7 said:

A lot of inaccurate info here re the lenght of leases.
It's not 999 years as posted by some but 125 years, in London it is on apartments built 20/30/35 years ago

In central london they were 999 years but the majority in london are 125 years.

Is there any evidence which supports your sweeping claims?  Does someone regularly publish an analysis of all lease lengths in central London?

Isn't the 'accurate' answer that the length of the lease is whatever the parties agreed at the start, or at any subsequent renewal?

diystarter7

user1977 said:

diystarter7 said:

Woolsery said:

diystarter7 said:

A lot of inaccurate info here re the lenght of leases.
It's not 999 years as posted by some but 125 years, in London it is on apartments built 20/30/35 years ago

In central london they were 999 years but the majority in london are 125 years.

The country extends beyond London. My info was 100% accurate, relating to a house built in 1898 and rebuilt in 1948. It was in Bath; like many others built on land owned by a charitable trust. I believe there are thousands of older leasehold houses in the NW around Manchester.

Of course, more modern leases are different and the problems with 'rocketing costs' are well documented. You can't paint the two things with the same brush.

the vast majority of people would run a mile form a leasehold house

Without knowing what the lease says? Many are ultra-long leases and utterly benign. Would be daft to run away from them.

And just as many are not "benign."
I've met someone who had a nice apartment in central London. They had lived there for a good 40 years but the remaining lease was 65 years-ish and they wanted to sell up and move to the cost/Weymouth area and were staggered/shocked and upset when given valuations on their property by EA as they did not think the impact would be so massive. They could not afford to renew the lease and where they were hoping to move to, they could not afford, so not as "benign"  many times.

Best avoided especially houses

Woolsery

diystarter7 said:

Woolsery said:

diystarter7 said:

A lot of inaccurate info here re the lenght of leases.
It's not 999 years as posted by some but 125 years, in London it is on apartments built 20/30/35 years ago

In central london they were 999 years but the majority in london are 125 years.

The country extends beyond London. My info was 100% accurate, relating to a house built in 1898 and rebuilt in 1948. It was in Bath; like many others built on land owned by a charitable trust. I believe there are thousands of older leasehold houses in the NW around Manchester.

Of course, more modern leases are different and the problems with 'rocketing costs' are well documented. You can't paint the two things with the same brush.

No one stated that your finding only referred to a particular area.

Nope, not a particular area, probably all over the country, but especially in the NW of England. Perhaps someone else will confirm this.

With any property people should look at the financial and legal implications of buying and get independent advice if they don't understand what they are, just the same as checking the structure and scoping out the neighbourhood.

Norman_Castle

diystarter7 said:

A lot of inaccurate info here re the lenght of leases.
It's not 999 years as posted by some but 125 years, in London it is on apartments built 20/30/35 years ago

In central london they were 999 years but the majority in london are 125 years.

Where's the inaccuracy? Leases will vary in length, some will be 999 years and some will be 125 years. There will be other lease lengths.

Norman_Castle

Woolsery said:

diystarter7 said:

Woolsery said:

diystarter7 said:

A lot of inaccurate info here re the lenght of leases.
It's not 999 years as posted by some but 125 years, in London it is on apartments built 20/30/35 years ago

In central london they were 999 years but the majority in london are 125 years.

The country extends beyond London. My info was 100% accurate, relating to a house built in 1898 and rebuilt in 1948. It was in Bath; like many others built on land owned by a charitable trust. I believe there are thousands of older leasehold houses in the NW around Manchester.

Of course, more modern leases are different and the problems with 'rocketing costs' are well documented. You can't paint the two things with the same brush.

No one stated that your finding only referred to a particular area.

Nope, not a particular area, probably all over the country, but especially in the NW of England. Perhaps someone else will confirm this.

My dads house was part of a new build estate built in the late 50's on farmland. The estate is in the Midlands and has approximately 1000 houses . They were all leasehold. He bought the freehold very early as I expect many others have since done.

diystarter7

Woolsery said:

diystarter7 said:

Woolsery said:

diystarter7 said:

A lot of inaccurate info here re the lenght of leases.
It's not 999 years as posted by some but 125 years, in London it is on apartments built 20/30/35 years ago

In central london they were 999 years but the majority in london are 125 years.

The country extends beyond London. My info was 100% accurate, relating to a house built in 1898 and rebuilt in 1948. It was in Bath; like many others built on land owned by a charitable trust. I believe there are thousands of older leasehold houses in the NW around Manchester.

Of course, more modern leases are different and the problems with 'rocketing costs' are well documented. You can't paint the two things with the same brush.

No one stated that your finding only referred to a particular area.

Nope, not a particular area, probably all over the country, but especially in the NW of England. Perhaps someone else will confirm this.

With any property people should look at the financial and legal implications of buying and get independent advice if they don't understand what they are, just the same as checking the structure and scoping out the neighbourhood.

....and on that note, we will agree to disagree. Have a good day.

SavingPennies_2

Woolsery said:

diystarter7 said:

Woolsery said:

diystarter7 said:

A lot of inaccurate info here re the lenght of leases.
It's not 999 years as posted by some but 125 years, in London it is on apartments built 20/30/35 years ago

In central london they were 999 years but the majority in london are 125 years.

The country extends beyond London. My info was 100% accurate, relating to a house built in 1898 and rebuilt in 1948. It was in Bath; like many others built on land owned by a charitable trust. I believe there are thousands of older leasehold houses in the NW around Manchester.

Of course, more modern leases are different and the problems with 'rocketing costs' are well documented. You can't paint the two things with the same brush.

No one stated that your finding only referred to a particular area.

Nope, not a particular area, probably all over the country, but especially in the NW of England. Perhaps someone else will confirm this.

With any property people should look at the financial and legal implications of buying and get independent advice if they don't understand what they are, just the same as checking the structure and scoping out the neighbourhood.

I'm one of the people who mentioned 999 leases. I've owned two properties both 999 years on the lease (starting in the 40's/ 70's.) in Manchester. 

Section62

diystarter7 said:

Woolsery said:

diystarter7 said:

Woolsery said:

diystarter7 said:

A lot of inaccurate info here re the lenght of leases.
It's not 999 years as posted by some but 125 years, in London it is on apartments built 20/30/35 years ago

In central london they were 999 years but the majority in london are 125 years.

The country extends beyond London. My info was 100% accurate, relating to a house built in 1898 and rebuilt in 1948. It was in Bath; like many others built on land owned by a charitable trust. I believe there are thousands of older leasehold houses in the NW around Manchester.

Of course, more modern leases are different and the problems with 'rocketing costs' are well documented. You can't paint the two things with the same brush.

No one stated that your finding only referred to a particular area.

Nope, not a particular area, probably all over the country, but especially in the NW of England. Perhaps someone else will confirm this.

With any property people should look at the financial and legal implications of buying and get independent advice if they don't understand what they are, just the same as checking the structure and scoping out the neighbourhood.

....and on that note, we will agree to disagree. Have a good day.

If you are standing by your claims (made with no evidence whatsoever) then you'll need to agree to disagree with a lot of people, many of whom have dealt with 999*-year leases themselves.  (*and other lengths)

SallyDucati

Apologies if it's already been said, but I think the most important point is to not let a lease get below 80 years, as past that point it becomes much more expensive to extend.   And also is the point the property value will drop due to mortgage companies not liking it.  Unfortunately a lot of people don't realise this. 

I did extend the lease on my last flat and tried to tell a neighbour the pitfalls of not doing so, but she didn't see why she should spend the money, until it got to 74 years and she ended up on a standard variable rate on her mortgage as she couldn't get a new deal.  Ended up costing her a lot more than she needed to.