Linden Homes, part of the Galliford Try group, is instructing defamation solicitors to act against the purchaser of one of its leasehold houses in Bedfordshire.
Louise O’Riordan featured in a BBC Look East report on the leasehold house scandal earlier this month.
She bought a three-bedroom leasehold terraced house at Linden Homes Kaleidoscope site in Dunstable in September last year.
A number of frustrations – including those concerning the leasehold tenure of her property – encouraged her to mobilise her neighbours and form a Facebook group: “linden homes | leasehold scandal | complaints | galliford try”
But the developer is furious that Mrs O’Riordan, who lives in the property with her husband and step daughter, also approached potential customers in the sales suite and questioned them about the information provided by the sales staff.
Michael Coker, MD of Linden Homes Midlands, wrote to her earlier this week:
“Your continuing distribution of defamatory misrepresentations of the facts, together [with] harassment of prospective purchasers and site operatives is unacceptable and the Company is instructing Solicitors accordingly.”
Mr O’Riordan is indignant because she claims that Linden Homes sales staff told her that the freehold to the site was owned by a nearby college.
In fact, it is owned by Linden Limited, whose directors are given as Peter Martin Truscott, the CEO of Galliford Try, Mark Robert Farnham, Andrew Richard Hammond, Tom Marshall Nicholson and Stephen John Teagle.
The misconception that the freeholder was the local college was widespread among Mrs O’Riordan’s neighbours, it appears.
Ground rents are £200 a year, rising in 10 years time with RPI and then every subsequent five years.
Andrew Selous, Conservative MP for South West Bedfordshire, was interviewed on BBC Look East.
He said:
“It seems to me that the developer is trying to make extra revenue selling the house and then collecting the ground rent.
“I think that is an unfair and wrong practice.”
Linden Homes said in a statement to the BBC: “Linden Homes has been clear and consistent in its response to Mrs O’Riordan and finds her claims unfounded and misleading.”
Linden Homes said that it would offer the freeholds for sale to the leasehold house owners of the properties at Kaleidoscope.
Mrs O’Riordan also has frustrations with Linden Homes regarding parking spaces outside her house – she thought she was buying two but only has one – and the quality of flooring, that she believed would be free as part of the developer’s incentives, but had to be paid for.
LKP has contacted Mr Truscott, of Galliford Try.
Linden Homes / Galliford Try has been invited to comment.
Linden Homes letter:
Related posts:
Protestors gather outside ANOTHER housebuilder: Galliford Try
Leasehold houses are the ‘spivvy idea of a financial director to make more money on wet Thursday afternoon’, says MP
Now it is Shanly Homes dumping its customers into unsellable homes
Why are leasehold house owners mobilising while flat owners suffer in silence?
Beech Developments sets off customer mutiny in Wales with grasping ground rents
Justin Madders MP demands LEASE chair has ‘no business interests in the leasehold sector’
This is scanderlous behaviour from the developers. First they lie and mislead then threatened legal action once their money making devious schemes are uncovered , nothing more than disgraceful bully boy tactics
This really is beyond satire! If It Walks like a duck, Quacks like a duck, It Is a Duck!! I’ll wager that Linden wouldn’t dare take Louise to Court for defamation- this is the hackneyed old bully tactics of spivvy property individuals. Well Louise has the support of over a thousand people….. The people are fighting back. The party is coming to an end for Spivs in the property business. They have had it too easy for.too long. OVER!
There are two issues here.
One valid and another not so valid.
1. Houses should not be sold as leasehold !!! Did the purchaser have advice on this? If not the purchaser has a grievance. This is a real issue that needs addressing.
2. The ground rent increase here are not a valid grievance. This case is certainly not similar to the doubling ground rents of others. The £200 per annum Ground Rent rising in 10 years with RPI is certainly not a term that would put off potential buyers considering she has alsmost 500 years on lease. There would. E no problem in prospective purchases getting a mortgage on such a lease.
I believe that this leaseholder may find herself in hot water if she harassed prospective purchasers at the offices of the developer. The headline in this article is misleading. It’s not the BBC comments which is the issue,but rather the harassment of prospective purchasers , if this can be proven.
This case is certainly not a case of someone buying a home which is almost worthless because of doubling Ground rent . Whilst we can argue why there should be leasehold houses , one cannot argue the increases with RPI are not fair. RPI is not a random increase but an increase in line with inflation. This basically means that in 10 years the time the ground rent increases to a sum equivalent in value to the £200 of today.
There is a huge issue here. They had lied an mislead customers. Plus Once the lease in in the hands on the investors they charge extortionate fees for home improvements and to buy back the lease significantly increases for no reason other than pure greed. I certainly would not touch a leasehold house ever again. And I’m sure I’m not the only one. Affecting future Resales dramatically
Interested,
warning potential customers of a Linden Home is not harassment Only if the customer asks to be left alone, or has been threatened could that be described as harassment.
Clearly in this case it is the action of a very publicly spirited individual doing their best to prevent innocent people becoming victims of L:inden Homes.
Oh I think this issue has stirred up a hornets nest in the ground rent “PIPELINE’!!! Managing agents are fond of accusing innocents of ‘Harassment “when they start questioning the Modus Operandi of Freeholdersand their dodgy managing agents.It called trying to intimidate!!! Those days are coming to an end love. What is your agenda ‘Interested’?
Cont… ‘Interested, I have read several of your posts on this site. These have included your musings on ‘Forfeiture’ / and your rubbishing of the form LKP introduced on this site which gave leaseholders who were shafted by venal Developers / Spivs ,the opportunity to voice their complaints as a unit! Please forgive me asking but – What Is YourAgenda? Are you building up a ground rent portfolio/ “Pipeline”? Are you a Managing Agent ? Are you a developer?? IF you are none of these why not join the NATIONAL LEASEHOLD CAMPAIGN? We are a mighty force and gaining much support.
Dear Linden Homes,
I believe Louise O’Riordan”s actions were totally justified, and she had just cause to believe she had deliberately been misled by your sales team, thereby purchasing a property that had she been aware of the onerous terms of the lease she would not have gone ahead with the purchase. Naturally.Linden Homes may be a bit miffed by the damage caused by the discovery of the leasehold terms that are so onerous and completely unfair. And yes it is only natural to be concerned by a potential fall in sales that will be the inevitable result of such widespread publicity.
Should you wish to pursue legal action against Mrs O’Riordan, I guess you will have to sue me as well?
And perhaps another 2,000(and growing) people who stand 100% with Mrs O’Riordan.
Michael Coker, you seem to need reminding that YOU, and all the other senior management of other builders involved with unnecessary leasehold houses, are the cause of all these problems.
I totally support and stand by everything that Michael Epstein says. So sue me as well.
You and others who are involved are a disgrace to the decent people of this country. Stop selling leasehold houses now. There is absolutely no need for it other than your greed.
We need to quickly make the whole country aware NOT to buy leasehold houses anymore, under any circumstances.
If Mrs O’Riordan has irritated you, perhaps it would be better if we arranged for a couple of coachloads of “specialist advisors” to come and visit your sales sites every week end throughout the spring and summer. The “advisors” would just ensure that your prospective clients would be given the full “truthful facts” on what horrendous total costs they could incur over the term of a lease.
If you do instruct a solicitor to write to Mrs O’Riordan I sincerely hope he is a half decent one with some old English morals and tells you to grow up instead.
From many years ago there are a number of “old type” house leases that were acceptable but, people like you Mr Coker, and Taylor Wimpey etc, have blackened the market across the board.
Dear Linden Homes,
I and a few others are willing to contribute to Mrs O’Riordan’s legal expenses if you pursue legal action against her. Her actions have demonstrably been in the public interest. You don’t have a leg to stand on.
Silencing & isolating leaseholders and discrediting websites like this one is part of the course. A few years ago leaseholders had no chance and no voice, against freeholders.
Thank god for the Internet because now it is so much harder to hide the injustice of the system.
When I first looked into the leasehold system – it was a few years ago, I had very moderate views. After all there is something to be said about well- managed uniformly built houses and flats. The deeper one digs, the more stunned One becomes, with casual fraud, general corruption and systematic nepotism of the system. “Consultations” about service charges and ‘voluntary codes” are in effect meaningless phrases, there is no enforcement and no penalties for offending freeholders.
The solution is to follow the example of the Scots, (and the rest of the world for that matter. ) England and Wales are the only places in the world still clinging in to their feudal remnants did you know that?
The origins are steeped in the depths of time going back to the Middle Ages.
In 1290 Subinfuedation was abolished under the Statute of Quia Emptores 1290
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/Edw1/18/1/contents
– no more Feudalism. This is what has been misconstrued allowing open financial abuse at the expense of the Leaseholder,
Mesne Lords = commoners = lower ranks = Ground Landlord. This ended Subinfuedation = no more mesne = when land sold – free from incumbrances. In the matter of Forfeiture/Repossession cases often include the demand for Mesne Costs/Profits. This is a covert attempt to demand actual Rent in that the Lessee has now been relegated to Tenant status without any of the protection. Tenants are the Equity whereas the Lessee owns the Equity. The latter now appears to be a moot point.
There are only a handful of actual Feudal Landlords left in the UK. The problem here is that the breed arising from the 1980’s are self made opportunists without any of the background training and knowledge within the Landed Gentry. The Gentry to a point had their wings clipped historically in 1925 – look at the Acts that came out.
Today’s breed has no scruples and /or morals. It is all about the Money, as such curb the ability to raise revenue and in so doing you curb them.
An interesting point is the difference between Landlord and Ground Landlord, could this be another angle for the Lessee in the matter of false advertising to Misrepresentation to use as a defence ? Just a thought…
Very interesting. Good to know we have laws regarding freeholders going back to 1290. Personally I don’t know the difference between Landlord and Ground Landlord.
But then most of the legislation re: landlord tenants acts works in mysterious ways.
Dear Linden Homes,
You have clearly misjudged the situation. You foolishly though that the hackyned old threatening solicitor threat which is regularly used by imbecilic property folks to intimidate leaseholders would work????Well it hasn’t and it won’t. . You are busted and going the same route as ‘RATNER’ !! You have shown your slip and will be stripped naked in a court of law- You Know It!
Kim,
Do not be surprised if in trying to deflect criticism of Linden Homes appalling and shameful behaviour, they sacrifice Mr Coker?
Mr Epstein- I would not be in the least surprised. Dishonourable folk act dishonourabley. However you can put lipstick on a pig but it’s still a pig.Linden have shown their slip! Game Over!!
Protection from Harassment Act 1997
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/40/contents
s.1 – Prohibition of harassment.
1.(3) does not apply to a course of conduct if the person who pursued it shows—
(a) that it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime, – this is where the Lessee can research every element of their case in the pursuit of justice – no exceptions
(b) that it was pursued under any enactment or rule of law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any enactment, or
(c) that in the particular circumstances the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable. – The Lessee has the right to conduct their own investigation as to the facts surrounding the non-disclosed interconnected bodies corporate in the matter of the Transfers of the Freeholds without offering the same to the Lessee.
Context:
When the Lessee will have satisfied the above by diligence then the opposition will not be able to use s.1(1)(a)(b)(c)
(1) A person must not pursue a course of conduct—
(a) which amounts to harassment of another, and
(b) which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other.
There is no reason today to have Leasehold anything.
Abolish Ground Rents
Abolish Future Interests
As certain TAX havens do fall within UK Jurisdiction then enforce the Right of Remedy
Ensure all Leases are governed by the Law of Property Act 1925 – no more Rent Act 1977. On older Leases the Lessee is buying the bricks and mortar.
Abolish the 2nd & 3rd Charges being placed over the Lessees Equity as there is less governance for example.
House/Flat has been built and /or converted. As such at the point of sale the costs of such will have been included within the sale price. Therefore there is no need to raise additional Charges over Properties. This is now a recurring theme. What is further damning is that the new Freeholder as part of their Charge has given their Lender complete control over both Leasehold and Freehold land and /or property.
How many examples are there where the opposition does not own the Leasehold to Freehold Title? No-one is checking the backdoor…
I agree that the libel action by Linden Homes is completely out of order. If Mrs O’Riordan is telling the truth then she cannot be sued for libel or slander. Whether she harassed potential buyers is open to debate but presumably the potential buyers would have to come forward and agree they were harassed for the charge to hold water.
However regarding the property that Mrs O’Riordan purchased I feel she is being unfair to the developer. She obviously knew she was buying a leasehold house and
her solicitor would have made her aware of the terms of the lease. The ground rent of £200 p.a. and escalation in line with RPI is not an onerous one and is nowhere near the problem that doubling ground rents have caused. She should have no problem selling this property.
Regarding the parking space she should take this up with her solicitor.
At the end if the day she knew she was buying leasehold. Sounds to me like she is just trying to jump on the publicity bandwagon. She apparently has a decent lease here. Yes she will be charged permission to carry out home improvements by the freeholder but her solicitor should have made her aware of how leasehold works. What exactly is Mrs O’Oriordan complaining about ? If she didn’t want a leasehold house she shouldn’t have bought one.
Having said that leasehold houses are a complete scandal and future sales should be outlawed by statute in my opinion. But it’s hard to defend somebody who went out and bought a leasehold house of her own free will, appears to have a decent lease and now doesn’t want it.
How do you know that the “Solicitor made her aware of the terms’? How do you know how that the solicitor wasn’t a stooge of Linden? How can you be do sure that she is ” Jumping on the publicity bandwagon? Please clarify.
Grazie Mille.
I just don’t understand what her gripe is ? She appears to have a reasonable lease so what’s her problem ? If she was not aware of the lease terms then her issue is with her solicitor not the developer.
I am sure she would have stated that the solicitor was a stooge of Linden but she hasn’t so I assume that was not the case.
She is jumping on the bandwagon in my opinion. Why do I think that ? Because she has a lease that seems perfectly fine as far as leases go.
Ian
Just because you “don’t understand her gripe’ does not mean that it is not justifable.Also it’s never clever to assume. I think you will find that the lady in question has a very credible case. Linden are telling prospective buyers that the land on which the houses are built is owned by a nearby college – False. Why would they be economical with the actualite? Think about it and then join the dots. Why not join the NATIONL LEASEHOLD CAMPAIGN( closed Facebook) We are 1500+ and mushrooming.
As I unable to “join the dots” I unable to comment any further.
Ian,
As it happens to avoid a charge of slander or libel, Mrs O’Riordan only gas to show a reason or a reasonable cause for belief in what she is saying. So she is totally covered on that point.
A purchaser of a property cannot be expected to know the legal niceties of the consequences of having a lease instead of a freehold.
So you are correct in suggesting the solicitor should have pointed out the implications of the clauses contained.in the lease. There is simply no case to be made for her house to be sold on a leasehold basis instead of freehold. There is no justification for the assertion that a long leasehold is like a virtual freehold There is no justification whatsoever for a ground rent to be payable, nor an increase by RPI or a doubling of ground rent. every 10 years, Nor can it be right that a homeowner is expected to pay a large sum of money to an offshore company simply for adding a conservatory or replacing windows.
Just had a browse through the Linden Homes website, namely the “Kaleidoscope Development”.
I can’t fin anywhere where it refers to any of the properties being leasehold. (If it is mentioned it should be far more prominent).
Again this seems to be such a common misleading lack of basic information.
For those of you who don’t know, the first thing you need to do before buying any new build, or recent build, that will have one of these onerous “New Age Leases” is to find out if it is leasehold or not, before travelling to even view.
If it is leasehold, do not under any circumstances proceed any further, walk away.
As a last resort only proceed on the full understanding that you can purchase the freehold direct from the builder at a sensible price. This needs to be an agreement in writing via a totally independent solicitor before committing to any purchase.
However, do bear in mind that you most certainly will be surrounded by other properties that were purchased leasehold by people who regrettably were not aware of the full facts and consequences.
This will mean that the freeholder/managing agent still has “a hold” on those leaseholders, and the surrounding communal land, which they will be responsible for maintaining, and charging to do so.
Even a lease with ground rent only increasing by the RPI every few years is far from acceptable because with leasehold you can pay hundreds/thousands out over the years to the landlord/managing agent just to only get permission to do things like extensions, move internal walls, build a garage, replace windows and doors, build a conservatory. In some leases it even tells you how often you must decorate the house (note, I did not say “your house” because you only live in it on lease).
If you do changes without permission it can cost you even more because the landlord will use his might, and bullying tactics to make you pay up or remove unauthorised building etc..
Except in very extenuating circumstances there is no need whatsoever for Leasehold Houses other than the greed of developers to make even more money.
Trevor- Yup!! You’ve got that just right……
Trevor I also checked and could not find any specific mention of Leasehold only a sentence mentioning mixed tenure.
This development by Linden homes is a 5 minute walk from from my development where 36 flats were sold without a mention of the ground rent doubling every 10 years.
Connells of dunstable and your solicitors (Quality Talbots) along with McCann homes are all liable in this mess. If any of the 36 purchasers of the flats had known about the ground rent clauses I’d lay a large chunk of money that they would still be for sale today.
FairPlay to our local MP Andrew Selous for bringing this up in Parliament. Fingers crossed the ball gets rolling and this dire practice stops.
Edited to add infact the ground rent doubles every 25 years according to the terms of the lease