• 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 / Latest News / Have lenders refused mortgages on doubling ground rent properties?

Have lenders refused mortgages on doubling ground rent properties?

February 15, 2017 //  by Sebastian O'Kelly

Have lenders refused mortgages on doubling ground rent properties?

Reports from estate agents and anguished home owners report that the Nationwide building society is refusing mortgages on properties with onerous ground rents.

Similarly, the Council of Mortgage Lenders has raised its concerns with the BBC. Ground rents that may impact on the future affordability of the loans should be reported to lenders.

It stated earlier this month: “Known future ground rent increases would need to be taken into account by lenders in their affordability assessments.”

LKP specifically raised the issue with Nationwide of doubling ground rents – doubling every 10 years with Taylor Wimpey between 2007-2011.

Other developers such as Galliard Homes and Bovis also have doubling ground rents set at every 25 years.

Nationwide replied: “Ground rents, including modern ground rents, at a reasonable level, consistent with local conditions, are acceptable to the society.

“There is no objection to a lease that contains a periodic increase of the ground rent provided the amount of the increase is fixed or readily established and is reasonable.

“If, however, it is considered that there is any escalation in the ground rent, or unreasonable service charges, with particular reference to new build being marketed for the first time now or in the future, that will materially affect the value of the property, it must be reported as unsuitable security.”

The Council of Mortgage Lenders provided a statement to the BBC Radio 4 You and Yours consumer programme earlier this month.

It reads in full: “Recent rule changes in the mortgage market over the past couple of years have made it a requirement for lenders to take account of all known future changes to a borrower’s income and expenditure that could affect the affordability of their mortgage.

“Known future ground rent increases would therefore need to be taken into account by lenders in their affordability assessments.

“It is worth noting, too, that a lender’s risk might also be increased if ground rent values are disputed in the future and the borrower does not pay while in dispute, as in such situations the lease could potentially be forfeited and the lender’s security put at risk.

“Clearly it is therefore helpful to both the owners of leasehold properties and mortgage lenders if ground rent increases are set at levels that will not materially change mortgage affordability in the future and therefore create potential distortions in the availability of mortgage finance on affected properties.”

Please sign this petition calling for an end to leasehold houses: https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/leasehold-new-house-builds

Related posts:

CML says lenders ‘reviewing loans to reflect concerns about onerous ground rents’ Nationwide bans mortgages on doubling ground rent properties Police may need to investigate ground rent scandal, says Bottomley Ground rent scandal risks becoming full-blown crisis as loans are refused on blighted homes After ground rents and cladding … now lenders won’t touch rip-off ‘fleecehold’ properties either, BBC reports

Category: Latest News, News, Taylor WimpeyTag: Council of Mortgage Lenders, Nationwide

Sign up to the LKP newsletter

Fill in the link here

Latest Tweets

Tweets by @LKPleasehold

Mentions

Anthony Essien (34) APPG (44) ARMA (91) Benjamin Mire (32) Cladding scandal (71) Clive Betts MP (33) CMA (46) Commonhold (56) Competition and Markets Authority (42) Countryside Properties plc (33) FirstPort (55) Grenfell cladding (56) Ground rents (55) Israel Moskovitz (32) James Brokenshire MP (31) Jim Fitzpatrick (36) Jim Fitzpatrick MP (31) Justin Bates (41) Justin Madders MP (75) Katie Kendrick (41) Law Commission (61) LEASE (68) Leasehold Advisory Service (65) Leasehold houses (32) Liam Spender (39) Long Harbour (51) Lord Greenhalgh (32) Martin Boyd (87) McCarthy and Stone (43) National Leasehold Campaign (42) Persimmon (49) Peverel (61) Property tribunal (49) Retirement (38) Robert Jenrick (33) Roger Southam (47) Sajid Javid (38) Sebastian O’Kelly (67) Sir Peter Bottomley (211) Taylor Wimpey (106) Tchenguiz (33) The Guardian (33) The Times (34) Vincent Tchenguiz (45) Waking watch contracts (40)
Previous Post: « Leasehold rip-offs are ‘legalised extortion’ by housebuilders, says Chartered Institute of Building
Next Post: Taylor Wimpey delays ground rent scandal ‘review’ to April, and hopes, like Mr Micawber, ‘something will turn up’ »

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Michael Epstein

    February 16, 2017 at 5:24 pm

    Has anyone asked if leasehold houses would be covered by the Flood Re insurance scheme?
    It occurs to me that leasehold flats have been excluded from the scheme on the grounds that they are deemed to be a commercial entity, so could the same be true of houses bought on leasehold?

    • Leaseholder

      February 16, 2017 at 7:28 pm

      That shatters the illusion that leaseholders are home owners then, we are tenants and the government needs to clarify our position and strengthen our rights. That’s what happens in a democracy right?

      • Another Leaseholder

        February 16, 2017 at 8:42 pm

        Hi Leaseholder. As ‘another leaseholder’ going through an arduous and tiresome lease extension process and having read a few tribunal cases, I can confirm that we are seen and referred to as ‘tenants’ by the judges, not home owners!

        And the Freeholder’s are considered to be our Landlords!

        Hmm … The leasehold system stinks, and I believe lease agreements are a form of entrapment as most leaseholders do not have a clue what they are letting themselves in for when they sign up.

        Perhaps lease agreements should be renamed ‘rental agreements’ or ‘not so assured tenancy agreements’ because in reality that is what they are. At least a change in name would alert future leaseholders to the need to get fully informed before making the leap into the murky world of leasehold properties.

        There you go … my thought for the day! Oh yeah, conversion of leasehold properties to commonhold or a share of the freehold at the freeholder’s expense as suggested by the head of the Institute of Chartered Builders in one of the other articles would go a long way to solving many if not all of the problems leaseholders face.

        • B

          February 19, 2017 at 10:39 pm

          It seems odd that you use the term Lease Agreement I bought a Long Residential Building Lease being a Contract made by Deed signed under Seal. What are people signing for today? I’ve actually stood in the court room and shouted at the Judge this very point. He seemed surprised until he looked at the Lease – and agreed with me. These are very strange times..

          • another Leaseholder

            February 20, 2017 at 11:25 am

            Hi B. I am not sure what people are signing up to today but my lease is simply titled ‘Lease’ from the 1960s made between the builder and the first leaseholder. The title was transferred to the new leaseholders at every point of sale thereafter. It seems the business of selling off the freeholds is not new as the builder sold it onto a chartered surveyor who seems to have used it as a future pension pot, i.e. once the leaseholders started to realise the need to extend the leases he was onto a nice little earner. He has passed on but his family retains the freehold and can still look forward to some nice little earners as some of us have yet to extend the leases and it is now getting to be very expensive to the point of almost unaffordable. I was offered initially the option of an informal deal that contained a staggering ground rent structure that almost made my eyes pop out and made me realise that I cannot trust the freeholder or his agent to act with honour or integrity and so I have had to get to grips with the subject and commission my own independent valuer. There you go, hope that helps.

    • martin

      February 17, 2017 at 4:47 pm

      All properties build after a certain date (2009 seems to ring a bell) are excluded from Flood re:

      The assumption is that developers were not meant to be building on flood risk areas after this date.

      • B

        February 19, 2017 at 10:36 pm

        If this is the case, then would the Lessee have a redress issue via a Blight Notice as ultimately it is the Planning Dept who allows the build process? Just musing here…

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.

Barry Passmore

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 © 2025 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