Lease Extension - Advice please

[LucyLeaseExtension]

Does anyone have any advice whether I'm better off using a solicitor & a separate valuer or if I'd be better using somewhere like Homehold that does the entire thing?

The Freeholder is an arse who has his solicitor on speed dial if that makes any difference.

There are 8 flats, another flat owner tried to get an extension but was told it would cost £15,000, so he didn't follow through.

From what I've read (& I'm happy to be corrected) it should be £3-4,000 plus valuers/solicitors charges & Freeholders 'reasonable' legal fees.Average cost £9500 all up.

Not thrilled about that, but if I need to do it, I need to do it.

really just need to know which is better valuer & solicitor or a company that does the whole thing??

...and any reccomendations for either or other advice.

many thanks in advance!

@MyCatIsInCharge

it bloody well is!' Hopefully not for too much longer, but too long for me to wait & see! Unfortunately

I know! We went through all this a few years ago so I feel your pain. Local estate agents are wrong - flats with leases below 80 years will be considered unmortgageable by many lenders. You can still sell them but will probably have to start the lease extension process prior to exchange…so much better to get it sorted now.

Of course, if the freeholder is reasonable, you may get somewhere with an informal request. But the statutory route is always open to you…

Leasehold needs to be abolished, it's legalised robbery .

Let's just say 'reasonable' is NOT a word I'd use to describe him.

I'll be going statutory, otherwise god only knows how long it'll take or how many ridiculous clauses he'll try to add in.

@hattie43 it really does & in properties such as mine, the solicitors benefit more than anyone else.

We used separate valuer and solicitor and it was about £19k all in (£700k London property so not that different proportionally). But we had a reasonable management company/Freeholder to negotiate with, so it was fairly painless. But for you it sounds like statutory is the way to go.

Leasehold has a place or else you will never get people to do maintenance on a building etc....... its bad enough getting them to pay service charges for maintenance when it is a lease condition!

There are some dodgy leaseholds, and the majority of houses should not be leasehold that is the dodgy aspect and that has given all leasehold a bad name.

@ItsSnowJokes

Having a freeholder is no guarantee maintenance will be done either!!

I don't really have an issue with having a Freeholder & paying for maintenance/cleaning/CCTV I just wish we'd get what we pay for! The ground rent is minimal, so I definitely don't mind that, what I do mind is having to pay for & get a LeaseExtension, it should be 990 years.

there will be much more nagging once they extend the Lease. I don't want to say too much more on here, but I'll be looking for a company or Solicitor tomorrow to get the ball rolling.

as well as Home one I named earlier I've found a couple of others. The home one is a fixed price for the legal, which is good to know how much but it's around £2400 +VAT (plus premium, plus FH Solucitors fees).

their 'on tap' Soluctor will flakey invoice then as much as they can possibly get away with, so I need to find out what's considered 'reasonable'.

im too tired for all of this malarkey

@snowjokes

Why assume leaseholders don't want to look after their homes . In fact without the rip off spurious charges from managing agents and Freeholders there would be far more money available to actually maintain buildings .
The only people who want to retain the Leasehold tenure are the above who don't want their income streams drying up . Why on earth should third parties profit from a persons home. And where else can you be demanded the price of a family car for 'maintenance' and risk losing your home if you can't pay .
If the Tories are serious about levelling up they'll eradicate this but of course they won't because too many of them are freeholders or associated to freeholders .

I'm a freeholder (although in the process of selling it to the leaseholders as we no longer live there) and there is more to maintenance than just doing up the property. Legal requirements that have to be done such as asbestos checks, fire alarm testing etc.... these have to be done or the consequences could be devastating. We have made no money (other than the very small ground rent payments which were less than 150 a year in total for the property) other than lease extensions, and we have always advised leaseholders to go for a statutory extension.

We only bought the freehold as no other leaseholder wanted it at that time, and we wanted to keep service charges as affordable as possible for us and everyone else.

It can be a nightmare getting service charges for maintenance from leaseholders, these were our neighbours so in the end we had to employ a managing agent for the block as it was awkward as hell having to get money out of them when they just wouldn't pay. They also all broke the terms of their lease, some with horrible consequences for other leaseholders so court action was started against 2 and it was horrific having to see these people on a daily basis. We were abused when they saw us on at least a weekly basis. So no, not all freeholders are living it up trying to rip off all leaseholders. A lot are small freeholders like we are!

@ItsSnowJokes

i feel for the situation you ended up in. Some of my neighbours were majorly passed off that we weren't offered the freehold when the last lot sold it to the new lot, I said I was fine with that because it's impossible to get this lot to discuss anything together, let alone come to an agreement & I didn't want the hassle!'

Unfortunately the new Freeholder, is just a twat, who would rather we all fucked off & sold to him at an utterly ridiculous price so he can rent the flats out at an exorbitant cost.

We get charged for stuff we don't get (Cctv etc) and getting proof of buildings insurance etc is like pulling teeth.

NEVER AGAIN

I did know what I was doing buying a leasehold property (no choice in the area for what I could afford at the time, unfortunately), I just didn't realise it would be this bad, or at least thought there would be more tenant 'rights' when they don't 'perform'

His other tenants at his other properties are just as unimpressed.

You do realise it is illegal for the freeholder to sell the freehold without giving leaseholders the right of first refusal? So when they sold it on you could have taken them to a tribunal and would have won very easily.

There are legal ways round to sell a freehold such as selling the company if the freehold is held in a limited company, but you would have still had a shot at a tribunal.

@ItsSnowJokes No I didn't realise it was illegal. I just thought it was crappy of them. But it was previously managed by an agency based in London (we are SE) for a bloke I'm not sure they had much/any dealing with. The management company were fecking awful too. As this guy was local and had a vested interest in the building we thought he'd be better, but he hadn't been, just a different kind of awful.

As I said though, no way would I have been
up for buying the Freehold, with or without the others!!