Spotted in a Moneyweek article about leaseholds, entitled "Money-for-nothing clauses will have to go":
In 2016 the average ground rent for new-build properties was £371 and £327 for older properties..... Keep in mind that that this is a fee for which nothing is received in return.
Er, isn't that why it's called rent?
The article also produced a lot of wailing on behalf of poor homeowners who were too stupid or lazy to check just why their new house was quite so affordably priced. They must have thought the developers were doing it out of the kindness of their hearts.
"What is more concerning is that as many as 100,000 leaseholders will have signed agreements that will see their ground rent double every ten years,.."
Well more fool them, either they didn't read what they were signing or they didn't "do the math".
Of course, once again, the government is expected to step in and protect people from their own cupidity.
Saturday, 12 August 2017
The clue is in the name
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
The whole scam leaves some ugly issues unexplored; such as what on earth were the purchasers' solicitors doing if they didn't point to their clients the implications of the leasehold arrangements? And if those clients had taken proper mortgage advice, what were the mortgage advisers telling them / not telling them about risks and implications? (I know no one wants to pay for mortgage advice but for those who didn't, I have little-to-no sympathy).
Agree with Bayard. Loud cries of "nobody told me! Waaah!"
The estate I live on was built in two stages, the first was leasehold, whilst the second stage was freehold.
Luckily my house was a freehold property which I made sure of before purchasing. The house next to me is one of the leasehold ones. Something I was aware of when I did my own research on the estate.
Sadly the couple who bought next door only found out about this when I asked them if they knew about the leasehold. Yet they had used a reputable firm of solicitors and had gotten a mortgage from a major lender.
So I don't know who is to blame here?
While the developers are certainly greedy conniving sh*ts, I blame the buyers solicitors. They are specifically paid by the buyer to advise them on the legal issues and they have spectacularly failed to explain to their clients exactly what they are getting themselves into. If the Law Society had any honour they would be investigating this scandal and striking off these people left right and centre as unfit to be in the legal 'profession'. But they won't because they're just a closed shop union, protecting their own.
(You might guess I don't think much of solicitors)
Agreed.
Sobers. Agreed.
Post a Comment