OH MY, The Most Stunning Beautiful Property

Captain_Mainwaring_2

matt99b wrote: »

You're wrong. 170k is plenty. 20 years ago this would have bought something huge in the same area. Sorry but thats the truth, and I don't see inflation rising by the same amount in 20 years, nor intrinsic value of property. Sorry but it's a fact.

I can go shouting about morality of leasehold. I just did. You don't need to be rich to judge morality.

We can stick our hands in our pockets but where are we going to get 375K from; that is ridiculous. Even on the best salaries you can't get that sort of money (barring ridiculous salaries above 60k). I don't even know how so many people manage to get that sort of money unless they're very lucky, have families with money, or have inheritance. We're doing this by ourselves. Even if I had 375k, I wouldn't buy a flat for it! Goodness I'd spend the money more wisely. Goodness me. I think it's sickening how some people buy such expensive value-less things; £20,000 bracelets and the like. Think about all the poor people in africa. My word. It makes me angry. Anyway. This isn't a debate.

Right, here is what you do, live in a cardboard box and give all your money to Bob "bar of soap" Geldof .

Of course you wouldn't buy a flat for 375K, though people do - there is a 1 bedder close to me on for 500K if you want to moan like a spin drier.

60K isn't a ridiculous salary - you haven't started to get the bills in yet, when you do you will realise how far 60K goes.

Yeh, yeh, yeh, 20 years ago you could have bought a 4 bed detached house in half an acre and a new car for that much money, travel back in time and do it then.
It's like this - if you don't understand what leasehold is and what it means then better you don't buy it.

matt99b

Captain_Mainwaring wrote: »

Take legal advice- there is much more to it than that, in this case there will be a freeholder who could also own the headlease and who has issued an underlease for the flat, there are bound to be rights of way and easements etc.

Maybe you need to take legal advice Captain Mainwaring, and don't presume to carry so much weight in your advice.

patchwork_cat

To the OP it is unhelpful to think what 170K would have bought 20 years ago - do I hear a hint of a parent speak there? On average the price of goods doubles in 10 years ( note goods not property) so something that costs 170K today would have cost 42.5K 20 years ago and that is not even property! Wages were a fraction of todays 20 years ago an EO in the civil service earned 7.5K what would they be on today 25- 30K? more than 3 times the salary 20 years ago.
OK I take it back be as mean as you like captain.

You clearly do not understand what leasehold is. Look why attack people- just pull out if you aren't hapy and don't moan because your expectations are realistic.

redcar_2

I think you need to do more homework on what exactly a leasehold means before dismissing it.

I'll hold my hands up now and say I'm no expert here but I don't think the level of control of the leaseholder is anywhere near that of a landlord. I don't think you'd need to contact them about anything internal that you do only something that is likely to seriously affect the whole building - this only seems fair as you are above someone else. There is no inventory / deposit / people able to enter your property / can I put a pitcture up here / paint this malarky like you get with a landlord.

I'd be wary of management agents as they can have potential to be bad but you need to know this before you just dismiss these dreams.

If you are adding value by converting the outbuilding again this might be able to be negotiated - its just like planning permission you accept you need this and checked it out, just think of it in that frame.

Edit: Oh and Capt M seems to be winding everyone up today - I guess there's nothing on the telly - so I'd not get too wound up by his posts.

matt99b

Captain_Mainwaring wrote: »

Right, here is what you do, live in a cardboard box and give all your money to Bob "bar of soap" Geldof .

Of course you wouldn't buy a flat for 375K, though people do - there is a 1 bedder close to me on for 500K if you want to moan like a spin drier.

60K isn't a ridiculous salary - you haven't started to get the bills in yet, when you do you will realise how far 60K goes.

Yeh, yeh, yeh, 20 years ago you could have bought a 4 bed detached house in half an acre and a new car for that much money, travel back in time and do it then.
It's like this - if you don't understand what leasehold is and what it means then better you don't buy it.

I understand perfectly. And I'm aware that 60k isn't much when you have a lot of bills. But 60k SHOULD be a lot of money considering everything. The fact that it doesn't go far in the property market doesn't make it right, or moral.

With your attitude, I'm guessing you're a leaseholder. And you probably own a lot of property. You're one of these greedy landlords who digs into poor people's pockets, owning half of London, just because you can and you want more and more money. If only people would be happy to have just enough. I've seen it many times and I know your type. But this isn't a debate. But if it were, we would be on the opposite sides, and I'd be glad- I can assure you.

I'm looking for sensible advice on the differences between SOF and Leasehold, and on how to go about getting SOF for this flat; and on how plausible it might be, and fees, things to watch out for etc.

Captain_Mainwaring_2

matt99b wrote: »

Maybe you need to take legal advice Captain Mainwaring, and don't presume to carry so much weight in your advice.

I own two leaseholds and 2 freehold title and one share of freehold title in the UK and one freehold title outside the UK. With the greatest respect I've been there and done just a little bit more than someone who is behaving like they just left sixth form.

matt99b

patchwork_cat wrote: »

To the OP it is unhelpful to think what 170K would have bought 20 years ago - do I hear a hint of a parent speak there? On average the price of goods doubles in 10 years ( note goods not property) so something that costs 170K today would have cost 42.5K 20 years ago and that is not even property! Wages were a fraction of todays 20 years ago an EO in the civil service earned 7.5K what would they be on today 25- 30K? more than 3 times the salary 20 years ago.
OK I take it back be as mean as you like captain.

No, salaries and everything was not as proportionately less as houseprices were. If that was the case people wouldn't invest in property; they'd leave their money in a bank acruuing interest.

I'm not going to address any more comments like this as its hyjacking the thread.

This thread is about leashold vs SOF etc.

patchwork_cat

Pardon - I don't understand what you are saying and I am not guessing at EO salary 20 years ago I am quoting my salary 20 years ago. I bought more than 20 years ago too, so i think I do know a bit more about what I am talking about than you .

In 20 years there have been 2 booms and one stagnate. People invest in property at the right time. If you had bought 15 years ago and sold 6 years ago (in my area) you would have made exactly 0 profit - invest that in a bank for 9 years and you would have made money. It is about buying at the right time and selling at the right time. To be quite honest if I was a FTB now I would be hanging fire for abit to see what happens to the market - negative equity is not a nice bunny.

Doozergirl

Captain_Mainwaring wrote: »

Take legal advice- there is much more to it than that, in this case there will be a freeholder who could also own the headlease and who has issued an underlease for the flat, there are bound to be rights of way and easements etc.

Well, excuse me, but I certainly didn't suggested that this was simple, nor that there was nothing more to it. I like to take the approach of starting at the beginning. That's reading the lease. It will divulge all the essential information - 'easements' - it's a lease. It's full of compromises. :rolleyes:

Matt, leases are essential. It's nothing to do with morality at all. They afford flat owners with the right to support and protection from the rest of the building and it lays down the responsibilities of all involved, not just between a freeholder and the leaseholder. Even a share of freelhold property will involve co-operation and communication.

The Home Information Pack should include full details of the lease, of ownership of the lease and the freehold and how the property is managed. I suggest you get hold of a copy and start to try and decipher it. Then, when we've established whether it might be possible to proceed, you can start talking to solicitors and ask them to get you to the position you want.

Whilst leasehold isn't ideal, it isn't a problem either. I do think that you might be over-reacting. It's a bit more complicated than just moving in somewhere and doing absolutely what you like, but you can do plenty to a leasehold property without permission and we have planning laws with freehold property too.

If you want a freehold property then you must only look at houses. You won't find a freehold flat. (Not one that you can raise a mortgage on, anyhoo)

matt99b

Captain_Mainwaring wrote: »

I own two leaseholds and 2 freehold title and one share of freehold title in the UK and one freehold title outside the UK.

Knew it. Why don't you go and see to your property, tidy up, or watch one of your many tvs or something, or go cool down in a ride in your mercedes, instead of trolling this thread.