Fresh appeal threatens to delay leasehold reform – government told to stand firm

The government is being urged to implement the full provisions of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 (LAFRA) without further delay, despite a fresh appeal against the proposed new legislation.

The Commons Housing Committee has confirmed that freeholders have applied to appeal last month’s High Court decision rejecting their challenge to the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024. This Act aims to make it cheaper for those with leases below 80 years, or with a high ground rent, to extend their leases or purchase their freeholds.

It has now been 18 months since the LAFRA was passed in May 2024, but there has been limited progress. In their ministerial statement last November, the government promised steps to switch on the Act – including consulting on the rates which could make lease extensions cheaper or more expensive.

The promises to implement the Act have not materialised, because the government was cautiously waiting for the outcome of the High Court’s decision before progressing their agenda.

The High Court’s ruling upheld the Act’s legality and confirmed its compliance with human rights, and should be taken by the government as a mandate to implement this legislation without further delay, according to Linz Darlington of Homehold.

He said: “The sense of relief that the High Court ruled in favour of common sense is now being drowned out by a fresh wave of exasperation. We are now 18 months since this law hit the statute books, and leaseholders with leases below 80 years or a high ground rent are still no closer to being able to secure a lease extension that is cheaper or easier. Every single day of delay is a day that many can’t sell their properties, the value of their homes diminishes and the cost of extending a lease or buying their freehold increases.”

The appeal process is long, with estimates suggesting the Court of Appeal stage alone could take 18 months, followed by a further 18 months if the freeholders take their case to the Supreme Court.

The final threat remains the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, a final delaying tactic should the freeholders lose at the UK’s highest level.

Darlington continued: “The High Court ruling was well reasoned and arguably leaves limited opportunity for a successful appeal – but even the delay caused by appeals will be a win for the freeholders. In the meantime, they will benefit from lease extension and freehold purchase premiums paid under the existing legislation.”

“The Labour government must now find the gumption to accept the High Court’s clear ruling and crack on with implementing the Act. They cannot stand by and allow the freeholders’ endless, expensive appeals—which are likely to fail—to hold the entire system to ransom. We are demanding they stop waiting for the outcome of appeal after appeal and immediately launch the valuation consultation and lay the necessary secondary legislation. Delaying implementation only serves the freeholders, not the people this Act was designed to protect.”

 

x

Email the story to a friend!



One Comment

  1. Anonymous Coward

    I also couldn’t agree more with Linz – the Government MUST activate as much of the new law as possible as quickly as possible.

    We seem to have a two tier market at the moment:

    – freehold properties are selling eventually but for a (slightly) reduced amount.
    – leasehold on the other hand is in significant decline with reduced volume and much lower prices.

    This is partly due to the delay in the legislation, but I think that much of it is because of the terrible language that the politicians have been using. Such things as “Feudal”, “Toxic” are bandied around left, right and centre. Also, for the average person they hear that “leasehold will end…” but this translates to “don’t buy leasehold because (insert myth/ personal fear here)”

    Technically there is nothing wrong with leasehold, not really, as long as the freeholder behaves responsibly. However, the majority of freehold titles have fallen into the control of a few very wealthy individuals/ companies who became wealthy because of sharp (not illegal but sharp) business practices. These people/ companies have little or no regard for their leaseholders because it doesn’t pay them to and because there are no rules to force them to.

    The 1993 Act looked like a big win for leaseholders, but it actually created an asset class that didn’t really exist before and the real winners were the freeholders, who overnight gained an ever appreciating asset.

    The 1993 Act was brought forward during a long stretch of Tory governance. Coincidence? I think not…

    The Government of today cannot admit that the 1993 Act signed into being by Parliament effectively handed billions of pounds to the wealthy elite.

    They should, but they can’t. If they did, then leaseholders would want compensation.

    Politicians, hey?

    Report
X

You must be logged in to report this comment!

Comments are closed.

Thank you for signing up to our newsletter, we have sent you an email asking you to confirm your subscription. Additionally if you would like to create a free EYE account which allows you to comment on news stories and manage your email subscriptions please enter a password below.