fazed Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 HI all, first time post, but I have been reading for a while now. Right I'm a First time Buyer and have been looking for around four months or so now, but no real hurry to move, I'm happy to see where the markets end up. Having viewed a few properties for around the £125,000 mark with the view to offer at around £100,000 mark. Well, I have found a house that fits my criteria, but I'm now very confused if the property is actually a freehold house or a leasehold flat. The estate agent has described it as a Coach House, but it is fundamentally a 2 bed flat above a row of garages. One of the garages is owned by the flat and the other two are owned by the neighbours, it gets somewhat confusing as to actually who 'legally' owns the other two garages, but seems reasonable to assume they are owned by the flat and leased back to the neighbours. Both the vendor and the agent are saying the house is freehold and the garages are leased to the neighbours on 1000 year leases. To confirm this I pulled up the details from the land registry, this is where it gets even more confusing. According to the land registry, the land the flat is built on is still owned by the development company. The current owner looks to have a 125 year lease on the property, ( started 2006 ) and the garages are on a separate 1000 year lease. When challenged the agent and vendor are both assuring me it is a freehold property and it is merely an oversight on the land registry and will be registered as a freehold upon sale. Could this really be an oversight? At the moment, I'm prepared to wash my hands of it all and find somewhere else, its starting to sound like far to much hassle for me. I have copies of the land registry findings I can post if that is any help. Many thanks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LiveAndLetBuy Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 HI all, first time post, but I have been reading for a while now. Right I'm a First time Buyer and have been looking for around four months or so now, but no real hurry to move, I'm happy to see where the markets end up. Having viewed a few properties for around the £125,000 mark with the view to offer at around £100,000 mark. Well, I have found a house that fits my criteria, but I'm now very confused if the property is actually a freehold house or a leasehold flat. The estate agent has described it as a Coach House, but it is fundamentally a 2 bed flat above a row of garages. One of the garages is owned by the flat and the other two are owned by the neighbours, it gets somewhat confusing as to actually who 'legally' owns the other two garages, but seems reasonable to assume they are owned by the flat and leased back to the neighbours. Both the vendor and the agent are saying the house is freehold and the garages are leased to the neighbours on 1000 year leases. To confirm this I pulled up the details from the land registry, this is where it gets even more confusing. According to the land registry, the land the flat is built on is still owned by the development company. The current owner looks to have a 125 year lease on the property, ( started 2006 ) and the garages are on a separate 1000 year lease. When challenged the agent and vendor are both assuring me it is a freehold property and it is merely an oversight on the land registry and will be registered as a freehold upon sale. Could this really be an oversight? At the moment, I'm prepared to wash my hands of it all and find somewhere else, its starting to sound like far to much hassle for me. I have copies of the land registry findings I can post if that is any help. Many thanks. I'm no expert but it sounds like it's something that a solicitor would sort out when they do the searches. If you can get the EA to state in writing that the property is a freehold then I imagine they'd be liable for the legal costs if the solicitor subsequently finds that you've made an offer on something that isn't what it says on the tin. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sleepwello'nights Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Well, I have found a house that fits my criteria, but I'm now very confused if the property is actually a freehold house or a leasehold flat. At the moment, I'm prepared to wash my hands of it all and find somewhere else, its starting to sound like far to much hassle for me. The coach house is a leasehold property. You will have to pay ground rent to a freeholder and probably some service charges as well. It's a fairly common arrangement on a lot of recently built developments. Why is it too much hassle for you? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tim123 Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 The coach house is a leasehold property. You will have to pay ground rent to a freeholder and probably some service charges as well. It's a fairly common arrangement on a lot of recently built developments. Why is it too much hassle for you? Because some freeholders rip you off on the service charges, and in this particular instance (one house and three garages) it may be difficult to use the law to replace them tim Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sleepwello'nights Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Because some freeholders rip you off on the service charges, and in this particular instance (one house and three garages) it may be difficult to use the law to replace them tim The obvious thing is not to buy it then. You'll find its very common on recently built developments for freeholders to have to contribute towards the maintenance and upkeep of the common parts of a development. Another stealth tax introduced by the last administration along with very high S106 contributions as a condition of planning consent. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Zante Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Coach houses are a bit strange, I was looking at buying one a few months ago. The property was being marketed as a freehold without any ground rent to pay. On the right move website I saw, via the property bee extension, that they had added and deleted the word "house" multiple times, indicating some sort of confusion. The situation was much the same as yours, you would own the freehold but the lease for the other garages would have gone out to someone else. You'd be due some sort of contribution from them but it wouldn't be much, if anything worth mentioning. As for converting the garages into rooms, I saw one fellow who had done this, and the result was a nice, if slightly unorthodox, internal structure. He was quite desperate to sell to me. My honest feeling is that life should not be complex and that if you're having doubts now, think of the problems you'll face when it comes to reselling. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tim123 Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 The obvious thing is not to buy it then. You'll find its very common on recently built developments for freeholders to have to contribute towards the maintenance and upkeep of the common parts of a development. Another stealth tax introduced by the last administration along with very high S106 contributions as a condition of planning consent. It's got nothing to do with the last adminstration. I had a service charge for upkeep of the "environment" on one house that I owned that was built in the 60s tim Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Driver Posted May 14, 2011 Report Share Posted May 14, 2011 When you have properties that overlap, leasehold is the most effective mechanism by which the rights and responsibilities between the various owners are regulated. It would be unusual for that property to be freehold in its entirety. The Land Registry document is correct, the agents do not understand. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.