Freehold + Leasehold Maisonette

eddddy

Just a further comment about potentially converting to a criss-cross lease...

I'm not sure why the solicitor is recommending a criss-cross lease as opposed to a "Shared Freehold" (with individual leases) arrangement as a solution.

A criss-cross lease might be a better solution than the current arrangement, but people with criss-cross leases are often advised to convert them to "shared freeholds", as that's a better arrangement.

It's probably a similar amount of work to create a criss-cross lease vs a shared freehold.

But either option would need the full cooperation of the other flat owner.


(Unless your solicitor has spotted some kind of issue that makes a shared freehold undesirable or impossible. Maybe ask them.)

NameUnavailable

If the neighbour won't cooperate to resove the issues and you end up having to stay there, I would take comfort in the fact that one day, when they want to sell, you can be equally uncooperative and block them from selling too!

pieroabcd

Why not converting to a commonhold, instead?
Unlike the leasehold it's like a freehold: it doesn't expire and there's nothing to renew (and there are no forfeiture clauses, if i remember correctly).
Maybe upstairs would be more willing to help?
Would banks be more willing to lend?
After all it's where the government is trying to go with new build flats 

bobbyfishmonk

ThisIsWeird said:

I'd imagine that Google or the conveyancer's regulating body would have the answer to any statute of lim. (Looks like 6 years, so no chance).

Ah - thanks for checking!

I also don't know what a criss-cross Lease is, but I'd find out if I were you, and stop any movement towards this if it ain't 'good', as Eddddy warns (he tends to know his stuff). It appears that your conveyancer is hedging towards this, perhaps 'cos it's the only or easiest solution they know? But, of course, it may be the only realistic option - who knows...

My understanding is the upstairs has the freehold to my flat and i have the freehold to upstairs, and we write leases for each other. I was told the lenders prefer this.

I'll try and find the LR fellow on here - he can then be contacted by adding a '@' in front of his name, I think.

ANYONE KNOW?

Can anyone help track this gentleman down please?

Appreciate your comments and research on this...

bobbyfishmonk

eddddy said:

Just a further comment about potentially converting to a criss-cross lease...

I'm not sure why the solicitor is recommending a criss-cross lease as opposed to a "Shared Freehold" (with individual leases) arrangement as a solution.

A criss-cross lease might be a better solution than the current arrangement, but people with criss-cross leases are often advised to convert them to "shared freeholds", as that's a better arrangement.

It's probably a similar amount of work to create a criss-cross lease vs a shared freehold.

But either option would need the full cooperation of the other flat owner.


(Unless your solicitor has spotted some kind of issue that makes a shared freehold undesirable or impossible. Maybe ask them.)

I really dont know why this was the recommendation - I was told this was the quickest way to get my house in a sellable condition, which is all I'm trying to do really.

bobbyfishmonk

NameUnavailable said:

If the neighbour won't cooperate to resove the issues and you end up having to stay there, I would take comfort in the fact that one day, when they want to sell, you can be equally uncooperative and block them from selling too!

Its an option I guess - but a very last resort. I kinda think I should just pay the guys solicitor fees because this whole ordeal is really draining the life out of me, and its dragged on for ~2 years now, with me constantly chasing 3 solicitors (mine, his, and the buyers). Its an absolute headache...

bobbyfishmonk

pieroabcd said:

Why not converting to a commonhold, instead?
Unlike the leasehold it's like a freehold: it doesn't expire and there's nothing to renew (and there are no forfeiture clauses, if i remember correctly).
Maybe upstairs would be more willing to help?
Would banks be more willing to lend?
After all it's where the government is trying to go with new build flats 

This is the first time I've heard this word! I think I might be too far into the criss-cross lease now to have the energy to start again with a new kind of lease rewrite... 

user1977

bobbyfishmonk said:

I'll try and find the LR fellow on here - he can then be contacted by adding a '@' in front of his name, I think.

ANYONE KNOW?

Can anyone help track this gentleman down please?

@Land_Registry (but no idea whether they're a "gentleman" or not!)

bobbyfishmonk

user1977 said:

Can anyone help track this gentleman down please?

@Land_Registry (but no idea whether they're a "gentleman" or not!)

Yes you're right - it was an incorrect (but innocent) assumption on my part. I apologise and hope the 'gentle-individual' isn't offended...

Land_Registry

bobbyfishmonk said:

user1977 said:

Can anyone help track this gentleman down please?

@Land_Registry (but no idea whether they're a "gentleman" or not!)

Yes you're right - it was an incorrect (but innocent) assumption on my part. I apologise and hope the 'gentle-individual' isn't offended...

Firstly it's not unusual to have this sort of arrangement so I don't think it's an 'error' specifically although clearly things weren't perhaps explained adequately at the time you purchased your flat.
Secondly, and this is aimed mainly at the route of your original post, namely buyer can't get a mortgage, as that's most likely simply down to the lender and mortgage product chosen - every lender has a range of mortgage products available for a whole raft of scenarios although most borrowers (logically) opt for the one with the 'best' rates etc or the one the broker recommends. But each mortgage product will have a different risk profile so one may say No in this scenario whilst another might say Yes. That all depends on what's put into the process to get to the Yes or No response.
Thirdly for most leasehold flats the market value is in the leasehold. Logical really as the freehold value is far less as someone has a lease for X years. The lender's risk profile will factor in the class of title and tenure and doubtless then asks Qs re how long the lease has left, who owns the freehold and so on
I think I have followed where the term 'criss cross' leases has come in although there's only one lease and a split freehold. You own your own freehold and leasehold parts so I can't see where upstairs comes into the sale/purchase aspect unless there's something they are required to complete to ensure that they, the neighbour, and buyer are then 'joined up' re certain responsibilities.
A criss cross lease (not a term I have seen regularly used by the way) is most likely associated with a freehold split with two flats/leases so each Leaseholder owns the Freehold of the upstairs part. IF that were the case then there can be some crossover as you would have to also transfer the freehold to your neighbour's flat. But that's not the case here.
The key Q appears to be why won't the lender lend against the information currently provided/processed? What has the buyer/broker said in that regard and is there a way of answering that that allows the mortgage/purchase to happen?
I'm guessing there's far more to this as the length of time (2 years?) to try and resolve.
Happy to look at the registered info if you Direct Message (DM+ me the details but I don't think that there will be too much to add to what your conveyancer has hopefully explained - there might be something though that makes you reliant on the neighbour to be involved but without looking at the specifics I can't be sure.
Finally, as it's the season of goodwill and some regular posters always wonder, yes, I am a gentleman and whilst it might not always be me who posts for HMLR it invariably is. A fact of no help to the OP of course but..........DM if you wish