• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Before Header

  • Home
  • What is LKP
  • Find everything …
  • Contact
Donate

Leasehold Knowledge Management Logo

Secretariat of the All Party Parliamentary Group on leasehold reform

Mobile Menu

  • Home
  • What is LKP
  • Find everything …
  • Contact
  • Advice
  • News
    • Find everything …
    • About Peverel group
    • APPG
    • ARMA
    • Bellway
    • Benjamin Mire
    • Brixton Hill Court
    • Canary Riverside
    • Charter Quay
    • Chelsea Bridge Wharf
    • Cladding scandal
    • Competition and Markets Authority / OFT
    • Commonhold
    • Communities Select Committee
    • Conveyancing Association
    • Countrywide
    • MHCLG
    • E&J Capital Partners
    • Exit fees
    • FirstPort
    • Fleecehold
    • Forfeiture
    • FPRA
    • Gleeson Homes
    • Ground rent scandal
    • Hanover
    • House managers flat
    • House of Lords
    • Housing associations
    • Informal lease extension
    • Insurance
    • IRPM
    • JB Leitch
    • Jim Fitzpatrick MP
    • John Christodoulou
    • Justin Bates
    • Justin Madders MP
    • Law Commission
    • LEASE
    • Liam Spender
    • Local authority leasehold
    • London Assembly
    • Louie Burns
    • Martin Paine
    • McCarthy and Stone
    • Moskovitz / Gurvits
    • Mulberry Mews
    • National Leasehold Campaign
    • Oakland Court
    • Park Homes
    • Parliament
    • Persimmon
    • Peverel
    • Philip Rainey QC
    • Plantation Wharf
    • Press
    • Property tribunal
    • Prostitutes
    • Quadrangle House
    • Redrow
    • Retirement
    • Richard Davidoff
    • RICS
    • Right To Manage Federation
    • Roger Southam
    • Rooftop development
    • RTM
    • Sean Powell
    • SFO
    • Shared ownership
    • Sinclair Gardens Investments
    • Sir Ed Davey
    • Sir Peter Bottomley
    • St George’s Wharf
    • Subletting
    • Taylor Wimpey
    • Tchenguiz
    • Warwick Estates
    • West India Quay
    • William Waldorf Astor
    • Windrush Court
  • Parliament
  • Accreditation
  • [Custom]
Menu
  • Advice
  • News
      • Find everything …
      • About Peverel group
      • APPG
      • ARMA
      • Bellway
      • Benjamin Mire
      • Brixton Hill Court
      • Canary Riverside
      • Charter Quay
      • Chelsea Bridge Wharf
      • Cladding scandal
      • Competition and Markets Authority / OFT
      • Commonhold
      • Communities Select Committee
      • Conveyancing Association
      • Countrywide
      • MHCLG
      • E&J Capital Partners
      • Exit fees
      • FirstPort
      • Fleecehold
      • Forfeiture
      • FPRA
      • Gleeson Homes
      • Ground rent scandal
      • Hanover
      • House managers flat
      • House of Lords
      • Housing associations
      • Informal lease extension
      • Insurance
      • IRPM
      • JB Leitch
      • Jim Fitzpatrick MP
      • John Christodoulou
      • Justin Bates
      • Justin Madders MP
      • Law Commission
      • LEASE
      • Liam Spender
      • Local authority leasehold
      • London Assembly
      • Louie Burns
      • Martin Paine
      • McCarthy and Stone
      • Moskovitz / Gurvits
      • Mulberry Mews
      • National Leasehold Campaign
      • Oakland Court
      • Park Homes
      • Parliament
      • Persimmon
      • Peverel
      • Philip Rainey QC
      • Plantation Wharf
      • Press
      • Property tribunal
      • Prostitutes
      • Quadrangle House
      • Redrow
      • Retirement
      • Richard Davidoff
      • RICS
      • Right To Manage Federation
      • Roger Southam
      • Rooftop development
      • RTM
      • Sean Powell
      • SFO
      • Shared ownership
      • Sinclair Gardens Investments
      • Sir Ed Davey
      • Sir Peter Bottomley
      • St George’s Wharf
      • Subletting
      • Taylor Wimpey
      • Tchenguiz
      • Warwick Estates
      • West India Quay
      • William Waldorf Astor
      • Windrush Court
  • Parliament
  • Accreditation
You are here: Home / Lease Extension / End lease extension ‘injustice’, veteran MP urges Commons

End lease extension ‘injustice’, veteran MP urges Commons

November 25, 2016 //  by Sebastian O'Kelly

Sir Peter Bottomley told the Commons yesterday that leaseholders are overpaying for their lease extensions and called on the government to end the “injustice”.

The veteran MP, who is patron of LKP and co-chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group, strongly criticised existing methods to value short leases – almost all of which were commissioned and paid for by the sector.

As a result, the market has been distorted which “means leaseholders are overpaying for their lease extensions by thousands, and often tens of thousands, of pounds”.

The early day motion “calls on the Government to end this injustice to millions of leaseholders”.

Chartered surveyor James Wyatt thinks lease extensions are a racket to favour freeholders
Chartered surveyor James Wyatt thinks lease extensions are a racket to favour freeholders

Sir Peter’s intervention supports the case made by chartered surveyor James Wyatt, of Parthenia, who commissioned an Oxford mathematics professor and a PhD student to come up with a fairer relativity graph to estimate lease values.

“On a 50-year lease flat-owners are overpaying freeholders £13,000,” he says. “Under the Gerald Eve methodology they would pay £33,500, instead of £20,500 using Parthenia.

“Lease extension experts reckon there are 40,000 lease extensions a year, which would equate to an annual overpayment of £500 million to freeholders!”

At an Upper Tribunal in May, Mr Wyatt failed to persuade the tribunal that his methodology be adopted, but he did manage to demolish the rationale behind the existing graph by surveying giant Gerald Eve. It had been commissioned by the Grosvenor Estate of the Duke of Westminster, England’s richest landlord.

The case was reported on LKP here

Mr Wyatt is now seeking leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal at a hearing scheduled for June next year.

Last week the issue was debate at the Law Society conference, where many felt the existing lease extension methodology was unfair.

Ironically, Mr Wyatt’s  court case has made the situation far worse for leaseholders as Savills stepped in to provide yet another insiders’ relativity graph which is even less favourable than the Gerald Eve original.

As a result, leaseholders are being asked to pay considerably more for lease extensions than they were before the ruling last May.

Sir Peter’s early day motion reads:

“That this House believes that, in determining the price for a residential lease extension, relativity, which is the ratio of leasehold value without rights to freehold value, should be set according to empirical evidence untainted by the effects of the 1993 Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 and untainted by most existing relativity graphs; further believes that injustice to leaseholders is perpetuated in the current situation by relying upon relativity graphs which have no pre-1993 market evidence and lack robust methodology; declares that the current situation is not in the public interest and that it means leaseholders are overpaying for their lease extensions by thousands, and often tens of thousands, of pounds; and calls on the Government to end this injustice to millions of leaseholders.”

Related posts:

Court of Appeal to hear Mundy case which will save millions on lease extensions Default ThumbnailCourt of Appeal ruling on Mundy case’s ‘inconvenient truth’ expected on Wednesday Private Eye reports challenge to ‘scandal’ of lease extension values Property tribunal upholds lease extension ‘scandal’ that pays millions to freeholders Bottomley attacks ‘uncivilised extortion’ of lease extension racket in Mortgage Solutions

Category: Latest News, Lease Extension, NewsTag: APPG, Court of Appeal, Gerald Eve, James Wyatt, Lease extension, Parthenia, Sir Peter Bottomley

Latest Tweets

Tweets by @LKPleasehold

Mentions

Anthony Essien (34) APPG (37) ARMA (87) Bellway (30) Benjamin Mire (32) Cladding scandal (71) Clive Betts MP (31) CMA (45) Commonhold (52) Competition and Markets Authority (41) Countryside Properties plc (33) FirstPort (42) Grenfell cladding (56) Ground rents (54) Harry Scoffin (150) James Brokenshire MP (31) Jim Fitzpatrick (35) Jim Fitzpatrick MP (30) Justin Bates (40) Justin Madders MP (67) Katie Kendrick (37) Law Commission (60) LEASE (66) Leasehold Advisory Service (62) Leasehold houses (32) Long Harbour (48) Martin Boyd (80) McCarthy and Stone (39) National Leasehold Campaign (38) Persimmon (49) Peverel (61) Property tribunal (49) Redrow (30) Retirement (37) Robert Jenrick (33) Roger Southam (47) Sajid Javid (38) Sebastian O’Kelly (55) Sir Peter Bottomley (201) Taylor Wimpey (106) Tchenguiz (33) The Guardian (33) The Times (31) Vincent Tchenguiz (43) Waking watch contracts (40)
Previous Post: « Last year: £64.8bn leasehold properties sold. £13.7bn was new-build. Leasehold house numbers double. Developers make £300-500 million a year from ground rent sales
Next Post: Sunday Times reports Taylor Wimpey ground rent scandal, as executives meet leaseholders »

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Michael Epstein

    November 27, 2016 at 7:55 am

    “Savills stepped in to provide yet another insiders relativity graph which is even less favourable than the Gerald Eve original”
    That would be the Savills that employs Roger Southam who currently heads up the Leasehold Advisory Service and was set up to offer independent advice to leaseholders?

  2. Fraser Maldoom

    November 28, 2016 at 11:05 am

    Roger Southam is not merely an employee but, according to the Savills website profile, is a Director in Savills Property Management team. Presumably he has persuaded both himself and The Leasehold Advisory Service that his appointment at Savills does not constitute a conflict of interests.

  3. Stanley

    November 29, 2016 at 12:52 pm

    Sir Peter is right. The lease extension valuation process is not in the public interest. In fact, I would say the Leasehold Law is flawed, inflexible and unjust. It is flawed in that it empowers the freeholder and disempowers the leaseholder and has clearly been written for the benefit of freeholders as demonstrated for instance by the existence of the so-called ‘marriage value’ clause in which the freeholder is entitled by law to a 50% share of a profit figure that arises from a hypothetical sale, and yet the freeholder does not contribute to R&M costs or capital expenditure such as roof replacement or electrical works. Why should a freeholder benefit from a hypothetical sale when he/she contributes absolutely nothing towards the upkeep and improvement of the property? This is just one example, albeit a key one, in which the law favours the freeholder and is flawed.

    It is inflexible insofar as the leaseholder has only two options: (1) follow the formal statutory route for a 90 year lease extension at peppercorn rental, or (2) if the premium is unaffordable, take the risk of signing up to an informal deal of say 50 to 70 years and hope that your solicitor is competent enough to spot any sneaky attempts to insert onerous ground rent clauses that could damage the resale value of the property. There is a third option of course. That is, not to extend the lease and forfeit the property at the end of the term and lose all the money poured into the purchase and upkeep of the flat. The law is inflexible because it does not take account of affordability or the leaseholder’s needs and plays into the hands of those freeholders and agents who are driven by greed and the insatiable desire to maximise profit at the expense of the suffering leaseholder.

    And the law is unjust in that it rewards freeholders and punishes leaseholders once the unexpired term falls below 80 years and the so-called ‘marriage value’ (i.e. the freeholder’s 50% profit share of a hypothetical sale) comes into effect. In the case of say a £30,000 or £40,000 lease extension quote you will find that the freeholder’s share of the marriage value can account for as much as £15,000 to £25,000 of the premium. It is a form of wealth transfer, from the suffering leaseholder to the ‘quids in’ freeholder. It is an oppressive law and gives weight to what a friend has called a form of ‘legalised theft’ and is not worthy of a Parliament that prides itself on doing what is right in the eyes of the people of this great land.

    If our new PM really does want a country that works for all, then it is time that the 80 year rule and the freeholders entitlement to a 50% profit share of a hypothetical sale are removed from the statute book. All of the problems arising from the use of relativity graphs and extortionate lease extension costs for those with medium-to-short-term unexpired leases would be removed with the stroke of a pen if the marriage value was reduced to zero per cent permanently.

    It would also be helpful if the government recognised and admitted that Parliament got it wrong back in 1993 and to put a mechanism in place to compensate those leaseholders who have unjustly overpaid to the tune of thousands of pounds simply to extend the lease term on their properties.

    My vote at the next election will depend on two things (1) the success or failure of Brexit and (2) who will take up a righteous cause and fight for the rights of leaseholders to be given a fair and just deal. I am not a believer in class warfare as I believe we are at heart ‘a peace loving people’ (a quote from Winston Churchill’s Gathering Storm) but I know from personal experience that this law is unbelievably unjust and the sooner the unrighteous elements of it are uprooted from the statute book and consigned to the bin of history then the sooner peace can be restored to the hearts and minds of suffering leaseholders and we can start to build a nation that really does work for all. Keep up the good work LKP.

  4. cathy

    December 10, 2016 at 12:34 pm

    LEASE EXTENSIONS -whether formal or informal- are a “legal scam”.
    1-the formula used to calculate premium is subject to negotiation with landlord; If you cannot see the contradiction in this statement then take your chances.
    2-landlord’s solicitors have every incentive to upset the process (their fees are due in any case)
    3-total lack of transparency of legal fees with the nonsensical phrase “reasonable costs” which is very misleading and subjective.
    4-large corporate landlords can afford litigation while “clock is ticking”.; Leaseholders often cannot.

    Solution:
    1-convert all leaseholds to commonhold by Law;
    2-prevent all mortgage lenders to accept such terms in Leases for lending purposes by Law.

Above Footer

Advising leaseholders. Avoiding disasters.
Stopping forfeiture. Exposing abuses. Urging reform.

We depend on individuals for the majority of our funding.

Support Us and Donate

LKP Managing Agents

Become an LKP Managing Agent

Common Ground
Adam Church
Blocnet property management2

Stay in Touch

To achieve victory in the leasehold game where you are playing against professionals and with rules that they know all too well - stay informed with the LKP newsletter.
Sign Up for Newsletter

Professional Directory

The following advertisements are from firms that seek business from leaseholders.
Click on the logos for company profiles.

Footer

About LKP

  • What is LKP
  • Privacy and data

Categories

  • News
  • Cladding scandal
  • Commonhold
  • Law Commission
  • Fleecehold
  • Parliament
  • Press
  • APPG

Contact

Leasehold Knowledge Partnership
Open Data Institute
5th Floor
Kings Place
London N1 9AG

sok@leaseholdknowledge.com

Copyright © 2023 Leasehold Knowledge Partnership | All rights reserved
Leasehold Knowledge Partnership Limited (company number: 08999652) is a company limited by guarantee that is a registered charity (number: 1162584) with the Charities Commission.
LKP website is hosted at www.34sp.com
Website by Callia Web