Talk

Advanced search

people that sell land with a development uplift clause are grabby

(71 Posts)
sallyismyname Sat 27-Jun-15 13:41:44

I've been quite interested in buying a piece of land. Viewed it s few times and went in to speak to the agent today. They've informed me that the vendors now will only sell with a development uplift clause so that if it increases in price at all over the next 21 years due to gaining planning permission I have to pay them 50% of the value!

This is just graby right? You want to sell something but only with ties so you can profit of someone else's hard work

paxtecum Sat 27-Jun-15 13:45:22

Land agents who buy land for peanuts off naive people and sell it to developers for a vast, vast profit are grabby.

APlaceOnTheCouch Sat 27-Jun-15 13:46:15

LAs do it all the time although 21 years is rather long for a claw-back clause.

If you're still interested in it then negotiate with them.

sleepwhenidie Sat 27-Jun-15 13:46:39

<shrug> Their property to sell, up to the potential buyer to decide if they are prepared to pay asking price with conditions - it's not unusual. The buyer will only develop the land if they think 50% of the profit is worth it...

Penfold007 Sat 27-Jun-15 13:47:54

They are being upfront, they don't want the bother of a difficult planning application but do want part of the profit. It's a common clause with ex NHS and similar land.

Remember it's the value of the land not what you build on it. You have the choice to offer on the land and to put in your own terms that they can accept or reject.

sallyismyname Sat 27-Jun-15 13:48:51

I wouldn't of minded if clearly stated this in the add but it seams like an afterthought to add it now I'm interested.

Land I'm looking at isn't peanuts, its 8k an acre!

HungryHorace Sat 27-Jun-15 13:52:41

£8k an acre? And it's a potential building plot? That's bloody cheap!

TwoTribes Sat 27-Jun-15 13:53:35

They can only sell it like that if someone is prepared to do the deal. If you're not happy with the deal, don't do it.

DameDiazepamTheDramaQueen Sat 27-Jun-15 14:00:56

I didn't know this was even possible. I am in the process of selling a piece of land atm and this could be an option.

I think 8k and acre is a bargain personally.

Sallyingforth Sat 27-Jun-15 14:05:35

What do you want the land for?
For a garden, 8k an acre is cheap.
If there is any chance at all of a building development then 8k an acre is as good as free.

SurlyCue Sat 27-Jun-15 14:10:57

Not grabby at all. Very sensible. They have land with potential, its common sense to get the best out of it. You would do the same if tables were turned.

Bannerstaying Sat 27-Jun-15 14:11:02

I've seen people do that with homes too Yes grabby IMO.

Bannerstaying Sat 27-Jun-15 14:12:59

Grabby because they could do it themselves or wait until they can, but don't want to wait or go through the hassle or have the funds so yes grabby.

DameDiazepamTheDramaQueen Sat 27-Jun-15 14:13:56

It's not grabby, I'm same sure most people would do exactly the same. It's the difference between us being able to give ds money for uni/ deposit for a house and not.

carabos Sat 27-Jun-15 14:15:48

Our wider family is doing this atm. Sold a small parcel of a much bigger piece of currently agricultural land with a development uplift clause. The buyer is intending to develop it but can't afford to pay the million quid per acre that it would realise with pp. We are essentially subsidising his development and will make a turn on it if he realises his plan.

YABU.

sallyismyname Sat 27-Jun-15 14:17:10

Well for the area 8k an acre is expensive its not in the south east. I want to have my own forest for conservation and return it to native species. I'm not looking to build a perminant residence there, just some temporary structure that is off grid for weekends away. Think George Clark type thing. Something that is movable so doesn't need planning permission.

sallyismyname Sat 27-Jun-15 14:20:22

I wouldn't do the same, advertise something and then add strings when someone is interested. I'm not a have my cake and eat it person.

Anyway with the clause I've said the land is vastly overpriced. Told them I need the clause dropped or a substantial drop in the price. The ball is in their court now.

ShuShuFontana Sat 27-Jun-15 14:22:01

surely this is akin to one of these clauses in contracts that are unenforceable...seems extremely cheeky, not to mention unfair

a bit like tagging some clause onto a normal house sale...oh yes, in 20 years time when house prices in the area have gone through the roof we'll be back for 50k...mynotfinkso

Sallyingforth Sat 27-Jun-15 14:22:32

That sounds a nice ambition sallyismyname

In that case why worry about the uplift clause at all, since you are not going to sell it?

whois Sat 27-Jun-15 14:26:19

£8k an acre is v cheap even without the possibility of planning permission!

sebsmummy1 Sat 27-Jun-15 14:26:26

I have to agree. Those are the terms, you either negotiate, purchase the land with those agreed terms or don't purchase the land.

sallyismyname Sat 27-Jun-15 14:32:48

Well I'm not planning to ever sell it but 21 years is an awful long time, who knows what the future holds. I'm just annoyed they've only now added the clause as I was about to put an offer in. It changes everything adding it now. I just seems shady to me.

sleepwhenidie Sat 27-Jun-15 14:46:16

No, shady would be if they tried to slide it past you in the small print without drawing your attention to it. This is just commercial sense if someone is prepared to buy it. It could take years to get pp (may not ever happen), vendors may need cash now or not be prepared/able to spend time and money on the application before selling at much higher value with pp (which would likely be more than the 50% they are asking for because it is then virtually guaranteed profit). It's simply sharing the risk/return.

TooYoungToRetire Sat 27-Jun-15 14:51:15

We just bought a quarter of an acre for £30k to extend the garden with no chance of developing as in an AONB

£8k per acre is peanuts

LazyLouLou Sat 27-Jun-15 14:52:13

YABVVVU.

Rural land is often sold with such a clause. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen 'a field' for sale without that caveat. So if the vendor sells for a low value, because the land is currently for rural use only, they protect themselves against changes in the land grant. They keep a lien on the registry for about 20 years, when it automatically ceases.

Maybe if the government had done something similar with its right to buy scheme....

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now