Freehold versus leasehold and uninformative solicitors

[Dreamerb]

I've just bought a house which was sold as being freehold, although in fact there is a lease and a ground rent - which my solicitor told me on the day of closing. We weren't going to delay closing on that basis, and as far as I understand it that leaves us with no comeback. We will definitely want to buy out the freehold - which shouldn't be especially costly, but it's irritating to have that sprung on you at, almost literally, the last minute. [It may actually have been all of half an hour].

The sale of our previous house is to be completed today: we bought nearly five years ago on the understanding it was freehold, and thus we told the EA on this occasion that it was freehold. Today my current solicitor informed me that it is in fact *not* freehold and that there's a ground rent payable. I'm (a) very annoyed, because surely we should have been informed of this when we bought? We would have taken steps to buy out the freehold had we been so informed; and (b) quite embarrassed, because we have, completely inadvertently and through no fault of our own, misled our buyers.

The ground rent has never been charged to us and is apparently something like the grand total of half a penny a year, so won't exactly cause financial hardship. Nonetheless, I'm most annoyed about the whole thing and especially with the solicitor who carried out the conveyance of our previous house when we bought - surely there should have been an onus on him to tell us the nature of our title?

Grrr...

 

[mf1]

If title is long leasehold and no rent has been demanded for years, it is likely that it never will be. Most of my clients take the view, on my advice, that given that ground rents are now rarely demanded, that they do not wish to incur the expense of buying out the freehold.

I think it used to be the case that if a leasehold property was extended that technically the consent of ground landlord should be sought to any such extension. In practice, I don't think people really bother worrying about it any more.

I appreciate that buying and selling properties is quite stressful with lots of things going on but did you never ask for a copy of the contract or deed for either property? Either of these would have made the nature of the title very clear to you.

mf

 

[Dreamerb]

I appreciate that buying and selling properties is quite stressful with lots of things going on but did you never ask for a copy of the contract or deed for either property? Either of these would have made the nature of the title very clear to you.

mf

Nope. Shall do so today, in respect of the new one, though. The actual sale contracts I did read pre-signing, and honestly there was nothing in the first one to make it obvious.

And my experience with solicitors may have been a little unfortunate, but both that we've used for PPR purchases have been very much of the it's-just-routine-don't-worry-about-it variety who are not easy to ask for copies of documents. In fairness, both have been otherwise competent and reasonably priced - but surely I shouldn't either have to ask about, or be left ignorant of, something as fundamental as the nature of my title?

 

[mf1]

I think you may be an exceptional client!!!

I think its kind of shocking but I can hand on heart say that most of my clients are more interested in wooden floorboards and floaty curtains than the title to their property.

On a totally unrelated topic, I heard someone on the radio say recently that developers and solicitors needed to do more to explain to their clients what was involved in a Management Company scheme. As above. "wooden floorboards and floaty curtains". You may as well be talking to the wall.

mf

 

[tiger]

In case you haven't seen it already, useful info on landregistry.ie

 

[Sunny]

On a totally unrelated topic, I heard someone on the radio say recently that developers and solicitors needed to do more to explain to their clients what was involved in a Management Company scheme. As above. "wooden floorboards and floaty curtains". You may as well be talking to the wall.

mf

I am sure you are right with alot of people but I have to say that I ended up having to hound my solicitor for information. All he was interested in was getting the deal closed (fair enough) and he couldn't understand why I was making such a big deal about the management company issue. His response every time I asked a question was "don't worry, it's pretty standard". To be fair, he came good after seeing that I really was interested in the topic and talked me through the whole process.

 

[Dreamerb]

I think you may be an exceptional client!!!

Natch!

I think its kind of shocking but I can hand on heart say that most of my clients are more interested in wooden floorboards and floaty curtains than the title to their property.

I'll own up to a distinct interest in wooden floorboards (floaty curtains and cats don't mix, though!), but they can wait until I'm quite sure of the property's status. Perhaps part of the reason I'm keen to be quite sure of title and want freehold is that I have friends who needed to acquire their freehold in order to renovate a property, and because it was an old leasehold it had got lost in the mists of time... it ended up taking them over four years to get the freehold sorted. The types of leasehold in my two transactions, by contrast, are quite straightforward, and I suppose that's why the solicitors didn't feel the need to draw it to our attention. Importantly, however, I do trust my solicitor - I was just a bit narked (and quite as much at myself for making assumptions, I should admit) by my belated discovery.

Tiger, thank you for that link - very useful.