The former PR of the British Property Federation, Andrew Teacher, who runs his own property PR outfit Blackstock Consulting, downplayed the ground rent scandal on Sky News today.
Described by Sky as a “PR consultant” and “housing expert” – although he has no track record as an independent commentator – he said that the doubling ground rent scandal arose because housebuilders beset with onerous terms from local authorities needed a “bit more cash”.
He added the observation that no one “held a gun to the head” of buyers of leasehold properties.
But he did believe – repeating the housebuilders’ get-out – that conveyancing solicitors had responsibility for not informing their clients of the onerous lease terms.
He seemed to believe this issue is being considered by the Law Commission, which it isn’t: it is examining lease extensions; enfranchisement; and commonhold.
LKP is aware of class actions in preparation against a number of the developer-recommended law firms who raised no issues with their clients about properties with doubling ground rents which are now unsellable.
LKP has suggested to Sky that it debate these issues with Mr Teacher.
Related posts:
Housebuilders ground rent scandal compo schemes ‘must go further and faster’, says housing minister
Barclays turns down mortgage on flat where ground rent doubles every 25 years
Ex-solicitor Ian Macfarlane jailed over £200,000 ground rent scams
James Tuttiett: I have lost two buyers of my flat through ground rent scams. Can you hurry up changing my terms?
Taylor Wimpey ground rent explanation ‘not true’, BBC is told
Countryside Properties plc and Long Harbour to offer deal to end ground rent scam at Silver Point
I find it difficult to believe that the main board of the likes of Taylor Wimpey /Bellways etc agreeing to such terms . My reasoning is that when these 10yr doublers were being offered to the market there were offered for not a great deal more than their normal 25 year doublers . I can’t help thinking that others further down the chain of command dreamed up these terms and in collusion with solicitors got them through. Then sold them to private equity funds receiving a private commission .
The main board have to deal with the mess
10 year doublers were being sold for 30-33 yp whereas 25 year doublers were going for around 25yp –
Today such investments are not sought after except where the flats have been resold on for less than they were originally sold for . The logic being that there is evidence that the buyer knew of the terms and factored it into their offer. If a buyer reflected the ground rent terms in their offer then they can hardly turn around and say the ground rent terms are unfair – but I am sure some will
Now there’s a novelty, Stephen talking of “fairness”.
So beleaguered are those developers, it is a wonder that any of those developers could scrape any money together to give their poor directors any kind of bonus?
How much was Jeff Fairburn’s bonus? Was it by any chance a £25 M&S gift voucher?(or a tad more substantial)
“The Law Commission have been tasked with coming up with a solution to enable people to buy their freeholds more easily but it may be some time before they respond. ” notes Justin Madders MP in his Spectator piece, at 09 March. 2018.
https://bit.ly/2HsHNqd
Hence the confusion on that point maybe?
Oh no, scrap that. I’ve just read your criticism again and note specifically which issue Mr.Teacher has confused.
Mr teacher should declare his own interests if he is going to make comments like this.
Leaseholder is a ‘legal protection’ for flatowners!!!!!!!!??????? Weird kind of joke.
Poor Freeholders- they must be suffering terribly!
So, Mr Teacher, your potential or actual house builder clients dream up rip-off leases with doubling ground rents, but solicitors, who are not likely to pay for your services, are most to blame for not spotting them?
Developers profited most from this and bear the prime responsibility.
Follow the money as to benefited most. Legals today today not even have the basic Knowledge on Conveyancing, they don’t even know what a Fee simple is. Mortgage Lenders should be brought to book here too. Until the total repeal of s.99 Law of Property Act 1925, then the Lenders can be taken to task. How can they lend on intentional toxic loans without looking at the full implications here. New builds from Flats to Houses are all non-runners, all are wasting toxic assets with questionable Titles.