Pay 10% Of Sale Price Rip Off When You Sell Yor Home

neverdespairgirl

That's true of lots of different places, though - for example, in some national parks you have to pay 10% of the sale price to the park authority.

Voyager2002

macaque wrote: »

Thats the stuff, forget stuffy old principles like fairness or right and wrong. If its legal, get on and do it. Just behave like a dog in the street.

Do bear in mind that the purchase price the OP paid reflected the terms: had it not been for the 'unfair' terms and the ten per cent leaving charge, the cost of buying the place would have been even higher.

macaque_2

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

For crying out loud! Why can't adults read terms and conditions and agree to them or walk away.
Everybody wants to be a victim.
It gets boring.
Some people really shouldn't go out without an adult.
GG

People who live in park homes usually do so because the alternatives are beyond their means. Their acccess to the land and amenities is paid for by ground rent. When they move home, they are subjected to punitive charges. What do they get for this money? The answer is nothing. In most other circumstances such a charge would be deemed unfair and illegal. Can you imagine the squeals of rage from normal flat owners if lease holders had the right to levy such charges. The crime committed by people in park homes is that they are a minority with limited money and influence.

If you are you are wealthy enough to own a normal house (which is not subject to punitive transaction charges) then I unreservedly condemn you for your selfishness and hypocrisy.

Voyager2002
Do bear in mind that the purchase price the OP paid reflected the terms: had it not been for the 'unfair' terms and the ten per cent leaving charge, the cost of buying the place would have been even higher.

Rubbish! The investment (and therefore the risk) in the asset was made by the purchaser of the home not the owner of the land. If the the value of the home goes up (or down), the reward (or loss) should go to the person who made the investment. As it is, if the value of the home goes down, the owner of the home takes a double whammy and the land owner still collects his 10% cut. It is patently unjust.

Running_Horse

In Sheppey in Kent there were a bunch of holiday home owners who had bought this type of property in full knowledge they could only live in them 11 months of the year. Yet year after year, there they were on the news saying how unfair it was, they were being made homeless etc. Did they not read the contact or wonder why their "houses" were so cheap?

blue_monkey_2

Maybe OP was 'left' this property and was unaware of things like this until now. They need to reply before we assume otherwise. It could also be that the park has been sold over to someone else who has introduced these 'like it or lump it' terms and things were fine as they were before. It is pretty pants though!!

david29dpo

My motto? Treat everything as a scam until proved otherwise. You wont go far wrong. I would have thought everyone by now knows the pitfalls of buying a parkhome or static caravan by now, its been on the tv enough times.

blue_monkey_2

I have to be honest, I didn't until the poster put this, I know there have been cases of the residents being hounded out by new owners and the like, I really was unaware that you'd have to pay that amount if you sold.

macaque_2

david29dpo wrote: »

My motto? Treat everything as a scam until proved otherwise. You wont go far wrong. I would have thought everyone by now knows the pitfalls of buying a parkhome or static caravan by now, its been on the tv enough times.

The people who opt for park homes are usually not in a position to choose. It is a simple case of exploiting the weak and vulnerable.

david29dpo

Maybe. But the T&C and there in black and white. I hate these people as much as the next and agree the weak and vulnerable need protection but with any major purchase advice should be sort.

Running_Horse

blue_monkey wrote: »

Maybe OP was 'left' this property and was unaware of things like this until now.

In which case they got 90% of the value of the "property" free.