The National Leasehold Campaign (NLC) has launched a ‘leasehold is not homeownership’ bus campaign in central London.
The NLC has commissioned 40 London buses around Westminster to spread a clear message that ‘leasehold is NOT homeownership’. The initiative will be seen on the back of London buses circulating the capital for the next month.
Katie Kendrick, founder of the NLC, said: “Following the King’s Speech, which announced the up and coming Leasehold and Freehold Bill, we really are at a crucial time in the campaign.
“This is no time for consultation fatigue, we urge all leaseholders to complete the governments new consultation on restricting ground rent for existing leases. The NLC is urging all existing ground rents are set at a peppercorn. It’s the only way to bring the existing leaseholders in line with the new. It’s good for consumers and it’s good for lenders.”
The prime minster Rishi Sunak tweeted on 29th August that he wants to make the “dream of homeownership a reality for more people”, but Kendrick is not convinced he is being serious.
She added: “What Rishi Sunak needs to realise is for too many leaseholders the dream of homeownership has been turned into a complete nightmare. They have become embroiled in an iniquitous system which they never knew existed. Leaseholders remain trapped in the building safety crisis, living in unsafe buildings through no fault of their own.
“Every day sales are falling through due to onerous ground rent terms or extortionate service charges. It really is a David V’s Goliath battle that needs to be dealt with once and for all”.
Cath Williams, co-founder of the NLC, concurred: “Leaseholders have had enough of endless words and false promises. This is the final chance for this government to help existing leaseholders. Five million leaseholders will not be forgiving if they fail to deliver”.
Jo Darbyshire, co-founder of the NLC, added: “Leaseholders have woken up, it’s time the government did. The only way true homeownership can be delivered is by ensuring Commonhold is the preferred alternative to leasehold”.
I doubt if any government minister would notice if this was tattooed back to front on their foreheads.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
It is though.. if you can make equity on it.. you own it
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
It is in the sense that you own the building, just not the land it sits on. Which raises the question, who would be responsible for REMOVING the building from the land, if the leaseholder did not renew the lease, or the time ran out on it and the building owner didn’t want to buy it? Or would it end up in a sort of Compulsory Purchase Order whereby the homeowner had to sell to the leaseholder.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
That’s not how it works – the leasehold unit is not demolished or purchased by the freeholder; if the lease expires they simply automatically own it.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Your comment sums up the lack of understanding surrounding leasehold.
You don’t own anything, and even when you’ve paid off your mortgage, you are charged extra for everything, and those charges are uncontrolled.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I work in lettings, so I don’t really deal with the legal side of leasehold! I get it in terms of a flat, but when it is a house, where the homeowner takes care of all of the maintenance, how can they justify more that a basic ‘peppercorn’ rent per year, or thousands to buy or extend the term? It doesn’t seem fair…
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Since when has the Government cared about what is “fair”?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Houses can be slightly different so all the comments below might not apply directly to a leasehold house, however, when you “buy” a leasehold flat, all you are actually buying is a multi-page document.
That’s it. Nothing more.
It just so happens that the wording in that multi-page document allows you the “free and uninterrupted use” of the inside of part of someone else’s building.
You might possibly “own” the internal surface layer of plaster and perhaps the windows.
It is in effect a very long fixed-term rental agreement where you pay approximately 99.9% of the rent up front in a single payment. The normal name for this is a “purchase price” but the technical name for it is a “premium”.
You then have an annual “ground rent” which can be anything from a peppercorn (nearly but not quite zero pounds) per annum.
For the duration of the lease, the leaseholder (a person who “holds” the lease – you can technically hold a multi-page in your hand) must pay contributions towards the maintenance of the building. This can be seen as either fair and sensible or not depending on whether or not you are paying the right amount to keep the roof over your head up to scratch.
If you own a freehold property you must pay 100% of the maintenance as and when for the upkeep of the building. So the idea of paying for the upkeep of a building where you only have a lease could be considered fare.
The only problem is supply and demand. This sets the “market value” of properties.
In full knowledge of the above facts, a leasehold property should be worth considerably less than the equivalent freehold building.
However, because buyers do not know the above, and the number of freely available properties for purchase in the UK is too low, the “premium” for a leasehold property is artificially close to the “purchase price” for a freehold one.
This state of affairs has been carefully maintained because it keeps already very wealthy people even wealthier still.
You would expect such an important piece of information should be provided to children at school at the same time they are taught about money and housekeeping principles, etcetera. I find it quite bizarre that it isn’t. I can’t imagine would politicians might want to exclude such vital information from the school curriculum.
It is about time that the leasehold system was phased out. You can’t abolish overnight something that affects 4.5 million properties. Worse still you can’t take money away from very wealthy people without them getting very cross and litigious.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
There are two legal estates in land: Fee Simple Absolute in Possession (freehold) and Term of Years Absolute (leasehold). That is enshrined in the Law of Property Act. Confusing people by stating on the back of buses that leasehold is not home ownership does not help anyone. One of the main reasons that houses are generally freehold and flats are leasehold is because it is difficult to enforce covenants on freehold properties where they are horizontally divided (e.g.: where somebody’s bathroom overflows and floods your living room below).
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register