Taylor Wimpey refused today to provide information about the properties it sold with doubling ground rents at its sites built between 2007 and 2011.
Pete Redfern informed LKP trustees Martin Boyd and Sebastian O’Kelly this morning:
“… we do not think it is appropriate to disclose specific information around sites or post codes linked to doubling ground rents, as this may amount to revealing the personal data of individual property owners.”
This response does not bode well for a resolution to this crisis by the plc housebuilder.
Taylor Wimpey has been undertaking a protracted “review” of the onerous leases it sold customers, and the highly remunerative freeholds that it created as a result.
Mr O’Kelly replied:
“It is perfectly reasonable that Taylor Wimpey provide full details of all flats and houses it sold where doubling ground rents apply.
“Similarly a list of all the investment entities to whom Taylor Wimpey has sold the freeholds.
“This information could be provided without any disclosure concerning past or current individual property owners …
“Your concerns about revealing personal data of individual property owners stretch credulity.”
Mr Redfern is meeting the chairmen of the All Party Parliamentary Group on leasehold reform, Sir Peter Bottomley and Jim Fitzpatrick, on March 23.
It has repeatedly declined to meet the full APPG.
In addition, Taylor Wimpey washes its hands of leases that have been re-sold or transferred by the original buyers:
“With regards to properties that were not acquired directly from Taylor Wimpey, as we are not able to comment on the sales process or the information that was made available to customers at the time of purchase, these will not be considered as part of our review.”
In other words, Taylor Wimpey accepts no responsibility for creating these toxic property assets in the first place.
On various Facebook groups set up by buyers, lawyers are touting for business offering their services in legal actions against Taylor Wimpey or the conveyancing solicitors that it recommended.
It seems that these issues are inevitably heading for the courts.
Kim
TW are going to bitterly regret their action. They will be finished. They have done a
‘Ratner’. I always felt that it would come to this. What a bunch of not very nice gentlemen!! ( No potty mouth here!) Can anybody on this site attend the Protest in Ellesmere Port on Saturday 18 March 12-2pm ??
Michael Hollands
We will have to assume that TW will do the right thing and contact everyone of their customers since 2005 who are on the doubling GR.
But will TW know how many of these properties have been resold.?
Kim
Who knows?
Trevor Bradley
MH, TW do the right thing?, come on, get back to reality again
Michael Hollands
Trevor, unless you or anyone else comes up with a solution, that is what we will have to rely on. I am sure that if any GR Doubler finds they have been left out, then they will soon shout.
Maybe TW can be forced to disclose
Kim
Here we go again!!
Jeffrey
Where does that leave people who have paid for homes/flats that were purchased through other homebuilders?.
I personally do not use social media so cannot view the Facebook pages.
Kim
Very wise Jeffrey. Stay away from Social media….. It’s like the Stasi.
Lesley Newnham
The more I read about the property ‘world’ the more disgusted I become but not at all surprised!!!!
The latest I have been reading about is the MIPIM conference now being held in Cannes!!! Apparently a yearly event which is being attended by members of our EX managing agent (which is how I found out about it!).
I then read an article in the Independent dated Oct 19th 2016 under the heading “All the sickening things insiders told me about MIPIM —–” which could just be journalist talk OR could be true!! However it does show why nothing is going to change in the housing market until the corruption and mindset of everyone concerned changes and unfortunately I don’t see that happening anytime soon as they all enjoy their ‘high life’ too much!!!!!!
admin
Many in the property world deplore MIPIM.
A very good journalist called David Hatcher deplored the prostitutes and men behaving like copulating hounds last year https://www.estateagenttoday.co.uk/breaking-news/2016/3/property-men-hiring-prostitutes-show-industrys-repetitional-issue–claim
It is an international event.
It has always astonished me that women are not more senior in resi and commercial property, given than in the former they make all the decisions, and probably make the most insightful contributions to the second as well.
Anon
The women that I have Dealt with at a senior level in residential property have been worse than the men, Truly horrendous.
Michael Hollands
I tried to put a comment on the other article about the Solicitor, but it has been closed down so I will put it here.
I wonder how a No Win/ No Fee basis would work in this situation.
I assume the Solicitors would (on behalf of the Leaseholders) be looking to purchase the freeholds at a fair price.
How many Leaseholders would they be dealing with in one go?
Would it be split into Doublers and RPIs?
What would constitute a Win or No Win.
Assume TW sold the freehold to the Finance Company for £6000 and the Finance Company was offering it back to the Leaseholder for £40000.
If a chosen Solicitor got it reduced to £10000 or £20000 would that constitute a Win.
With so many properties with their freeholds sold under different circumstances to different finance companies this is going to be a complicated exercise.if it is to be done in one operation.
A far easier alternative would be for the Developers to be forced (by Government action) to sort it out themselves and come back with a fair solution for everyone. They could do the negotiations themselves with their friendly finance companies and buy the freeholds back at a fair price for the Leaseholders.
This would save thousands of Leaseholders a lot of anxiety and expense.
Kim
I wish I could care MH! I do hope Mr Epstein has not been boiled in oil…. will we ever be subject to his fine wit and erudition again? Or has he been silenced forever? Scary …..
admin
There is very little chance of not hearing from Mr Epstein again, and he is welcome to offer his insights on subjects other than Miss Cohen whenever he chooses.
Kim
Excellent!! It has been a febrile 24hrs. I am abroad working for several weeks but will check in on my return. I find this site most interesting and informative.
Michael Epstein
Kim, See what trouble we all get into when you go abroad! stay in the UK PLEASE!
Kim
Dear Mr Epstein,
I am departing tomorrow for my work schedule- It seems I cause as much unintentional aggro as you do when I am actually in the UK!!! You are my kind of person Mr Epstein-I shall be back and posting in several weeks. You are spot on in EVERYTHING YOU POST ( In my opinion) You have my great respect.
Kim.
Michael Epstein
Even less chance of not hearing from me now!
To make it absolutely clear I have and never have had an issue with admin and I have no problem with the article and my comments being taken of the site.
It was a distraction from the main agenda and I am delighted matters appear to have been resolved.
Back to matters in hand!
Recently much has been said about the use of No Win No Fee Solicitors.
Like “Virtual freehold” the phrase “No Win No Fee’ has come into common parlance. And many people are led to believe that is literally the case.
As readers of my posts have come to expect there is normally a” However” coming up, and true to my nature this indeed is the case in this post!
However, No Win, No Fee does not actually exist!
In reality it is actually a “conditional fee agreement” and that is very different and once again can be prone to abuse from some unscrupulous solicitors.
The normal criteria for what people believe is a No Win No fee case is a greater than 50% chance of success (most solicitors use a bench mark of 60%)
The idea that is sold.is that if your claim is successful your solicitors fees are met as part of the claim, but if you lose the solicitor pays for his costs without you paying(which sounds good!)
If you read the contract very closely you will see that in many cases those conditions only apply to the proceedings, and you can well be charged an administration fee for preparing or deciding if the case is viable.
Since you would also be effecting signing the power of attorney away from you to the solicitor, it is now within the remit of the solicitor to progress the case as he thinks fit.
Crucially that includes reaching an out of court settlement on terms that are disadvantageous to you, but there is nothing you can do? The defendant is happy(they have saved a fortune) The solicitor is happy(they have turned a quick profit) The only loser is you!
So what about if you lose the case? Doesn’t it say the solicitor will pick up the costs? Yes it does. But as you go through the sales patter and just before you are about to sign “Ah, One more thing. We need you to sign this form. its only a technical thing more bloody paperwork” and you sign.
what you have signed is an horrendously expensive insurance policy that guarantees payment to the solicitor in the event of losing the case.
It is not unknown for a few members of the noble profession to earn their living purely on the back of the insurance commissions.
skipper
To the scourge of peverel, Well said sir exellent reading.
Trevor Bradley
An excellent informative article from ME.
From personal family experience I can vouch that it usually does work like that as well.
Our solicitor was” in control” and, although we “won”, the settlement he agreed was abysmal’
And yes, we did have to sign an insurance policy
Michael Hollands
George Osborne is a MUST for the APPG now he is becoming the Editor of the Evening Standard.
He has stated he wants to publish some big stories, we can start him off with a big one.
Michael Epstein
I can just see the headline for the first edition of the Evening Standard under the editorship of George Osbourne?
GEORGE OSBOURNE’S FORMER NANNY FACES 100,000 POUND BILL AND HOMELESSNESS AFTER REFUSING TO PAY FOR MAJOR WORKS ON HER LEASEHOLD EX COUNCIL FLAT!
Kim
Ha ha ha! Who said satire died when kissenger was awarded the nobel peace prize? HA HA HA .