Dear Pete Redfern … Taylor Wimpey cheated us: what are you doing about it?

Taylor Wimpey CEO Pete Redfern was deluged with emails this morning from desperate owners of leasehold houses.

The initiative was organised by the Facebook group National Leasehold Campaign of leasehold house owners.

The correspondence was copied in to Sajid Javid, Secretary of State at the DCLG, and housing minister Gavin Barwell.

Many emails were also copied in the LKP and its patrons Sir Peter Bottomley MP and Labour MP Jim Fitzpatrick.

Sir Peter, who is in India, then wrote to Mr Redfern:

“Four questions:

“What explicit advice would you expect / have expected a solicitor to give to a prospective leaseholder, orally and in writing, about the terms and their impact to the first purchaser and to later owners [of Taylor Wimpey leasehold houses]?

“Was the reason for not offering the freehold to leaseholders just the anomalous gap in the law?

“What is your estimate of the extra costs to the leaseholder to buy the freehold now from a new owner rather than from Taylor Wimpey as a willing seller?

“What time and where is this year’s TW shareholders’ AGM on 27th April, please?”

The feelings of anger and frustration comes across loudly from the Taylor Wimpey leaseholders, where the freeholders are owned by the shady investor organisations such as E&J Capital Partners in Winchester and Adriatic Land. 

Both these entities feel it is absolutely fine to demand ludicrous prices for the freeholds; issue demands for ground rents over hundreds of years; demand money for various consents to the property … and yet remain completely anonymous in regard to the ultimate beneficial ownership.

---

Dear Pete Redfern …

I bought my dream home with my husband in 2009. We had issues with the advisors we were told to use and had to write to Taylor Wimpey to sort.

Now I find out my wonderful home is now unsellable I am in massive debt (having a mortgage) on a home I have no entitlement to due to you selling the leasehold to the robbing company E and J Estates.

Not only do we have a leasehold of 295 annually but we have been struck by your sickening doubling clause meaning this goes up and up as I’m sure your aware.

I am sure my email means nothing to you as being on such a high salaried wage and sitting so much above the lower classes little thought is given to our struggles and troubles but I have 3 wonderful children I love with all my heart and all I want is a home I can watch them grow and we can all be happy.

Because of this scandalous clause we are now spending our spare time wondering where the money will come from if our lovely home is worth all the hassle and how we can end this nightmare.

I would love to hear some advice as to how we can over come this issue or is it something you have done to all homeowners across the company as from the leaseholders campaign it seems that way.

I look forward to hearing from you with advice on the best we forward.

Kind regards

Emma Conway

---

As a customer I trusted you …

12 months ago I rang to purchase my freehold, I have been forced to pay out £800 of my own money just to receive the valuation of £32,000. I have still been forced to pay my ground rent on top of this and due to having a surveyor for E&j complete the valuations I am liable for a further £2,000 in legal fees, this amount should have bought the freehold but it has simply put us into debt.

As I have explained to Andy Wyles [a Taylor Wimpey executive] there was no need for you to sell these houses leasehold and if you did need to sell leasehold you could have introduced a peppercorn ground rent. As a customer I trusted you, the sign on my wall when we viewed said “remember you are building someone’s home” I think you need to remember that I am not a case that is under review, I am a family, this is my home, my family home where my son lives, where we have friends round. You have taken away our home and replaced with a rental property. We do not own our home and you took away our basic right to be able to.

I feel like you are buying time, I was told the review would be available in January, I am not entirely sure what needs reviewing. You know how many people are affected, how badly, how much money you made, to which complained you sold so I’m not sure how reviewing helps.

Christopher and Lindsay Lloyd

---

Our home was supposed to be for my young children’s future

Dear Mr Redfern,

The reason I am emailing you today is because it has been brought to my attention recently that of January 2018 my ground rent doubles in price. I know you are aware of this as yourself and other members of your company took the decision to sell on the leaseholds of OUR HOMES onto companies such as E&J Estates. These companies are then ripping off unknowing customers not aware of the financial repercussions.

When we purchased our home in 2008 your sales representative failed to mention this important and expensive little point. It’s of my opinion that your sales representative should have clarified this and not completely ignored it as what happened in our situation and no doubt countless of other people around the country.

I now find myself with a completely unsellable home and a extremely expensive yearly ground rent as the years continue. Our home was supposed to be for my young children’s future once we are no longer around. Instead I am leaving them with a huge weight around their necks. This situation has caused me so much stress and anxiety plus the threat of huge financial losses both now and in the future.

I am asking you not to point the finger at other third parties such as solicitors but to try and rectify this mess yourselves as I bought my home from YOU, Taylor Wimpey.

One final point is that this huge scandal will not go away and the less you do will be to your company’s detriment.

I look forward to a personalised reply detailing what you are planning on doing within the next 10 days.

Yours an extremely unhappy ex-customer

Julie Mcgowan ( Mrs)
Liverpool

---

You sold the freehold without warning

I am somewhat surprised that you are delaying your review until the end of April, the longer that this goes on the more potential for damage to both your company’s sales of new build properties and also the resale value of our properties. There is good media coverage which will only grow as the numbers of people affected are made aware of the problems that are the result of Taylor Wimpeys decisions.

You sold on the freehold without advising anyone that you were taking this action, this was done after you put it in writing that the freehold could be purchased for 15x ground rent. I will say again that there was no end date to this offer and no suggestion that you would ever sell to another company.

Ms Jones

---

What is the need for your ‘review’?

Dear Mr Redfern,

Unfortunately I do not appreciate being sent a generic response that does not answer my very specific questions.

I am certain you do need to conduct a thorough review in order to answer my final question and I accept that, but my other questions still need answering. I was told I was important as a customer back in 2011, so I would appreciate the same courtesy being extended to me in this matter.

So, I ask again: If Taylor Wimpey realised in 2011 that the doubling rent term was not appropriate and took the decision to change this term in the future, why did it then sell it on in 2012 rather than revise it fairly beforehand?

What was the sale price of the freehold when you sold it to Fairwim No1 Ltd, a company incorporated just a matter of days prior to your sale to them?

AnnMarie Delaney

---

I was pressured to complete very quickly …

Dear Mr Redfern

I acknowledge that Taylor Wimpey have reviewed their policy on leasehold properties with regard to the doubling ground rents, and it is encouraging that a decision has been made to only offer freehold properties on new developments from Jan 2017. This decision, although welcome does not provide any financial relief for your current customers whether they have doubling or RPI linked ground rents.

As you confirm, my lease is linked to an “index” (this has recently been raised as a fault in my lease by an independent chartered surveyor as the language used does not specify which “index” is being referred to- a symptom of a poorly written document) ; and the freehold was valued by your company at £4200 in 2014. During the enfranchisement process now taking place the value has risen to £6300 by my surveyors calculation but we are expecting a much higher figure to be proposed by E&J Estates who currently hold the freehold. This will no doubt lead to a protracted and costly debate as I am liable for not just my legal costs but also for those incurred by E&J.

As you can see there has been an inordinate increase in freehold value since I purchased my property and so I ask you again why I was not given the opportunity to add the freehold at the point of sale which would have been less of a financial strain? Your ongoing review has obviously concluded extremely quickly that leasehold houses are not a necessary sales strategy and so surely the same rationale should apply to past customers? It is also disappointing that the review will not include RPI linked leases and I sincerely hope that any resolution or compensation consequently offered to customers with doubling lease clauses will also be offered to those with RPI clauses? The main point of this issue is that houses should NOT be leasehold full stop; and that your customers should not be treated as long term cash machines for investors. You obviously have some alignment with this statement otherwise why has your company ceased to build leasehold properties from Jan 2017- why did you not just revert to leasehold builds linked to RPI?

… On another note you have not made any comment in your reply regarding the pressure placed upon me by your sales representative to complete very quickly (in 28 days), which led to the additional pressure to use Bannister Preston your “recommended” solicitor. Since writing my first email to you I have found documentation from this solicitor that clearly demonstrates an agreement between Taylor Wimpey and that company to offer reduced fees – in fact the name of the development “Tudor Grange” is integrated into the offer letter from Bannister Preston – please note that this document was handed to me by the sales staff on the site as soon as I reserved the plot. I am in the process of taking legal advice on whether this constitutes unacceptable practice and if it transpires to contravene any legislation and/or code of practice I will pursue the issue. I have also recently gained access to my complete conveyancing file which will be scrutinised in depth for any evidence to support my perception of being rushed through the purchase process by yourselves and Bannister Preston.

Taylor Wimpey do have a moral obligation to provide continued customer care as stated in your promotional material but unfortunately at the moment there is very little evidence of this. Please be assured that your past customers will continue to closely monitor the situation and do everything within their power to reach a satisfactory outcome.

I respectfully request that you reply to this email within ten days.

Regards
Catherine Williams

---

I bought in March 2012 and have doubling ground rent. My neighbours are on RPI. Why?

Dear Peter,

I am shocked and devastated to discover my lease which is dated 16/03/2012, doubles every 10 years until the 50th year. The term for which the property is leased is 250 years commencing on 1st January 2011.

I have spoken with the Leasehold Knowledge Partnership who have confirmed that you gave a statement to MPs to abolish the double ground rent charges at the end of 2011. Therefore can you please confirm why, when I moved in March 2012 and the date of lease is 16 March 2012 I have been issued with a lease containing the double every ten years clause ?

Why your sales staff failed to mention this on point of sale ? Why was I given no literature to read? I notice you have introduced this measure now which suggests you accept there was a gap?

Why when I moved in March 2012 was my lease agreement dated January 2011 ?

What will Taylor wimpy do to resolve this issue?

Why my neighbours moved in June 2012 ( same month and year as me ) yet are on a retail price index led lease?

I will be taking further action should this matter not be resolved. This has caused me stress and anxiety. I bought a beautiful home from a reputable builder and I feel I am trapped in a house I may not be able to sell due to an error by your company. I have also been told that due to this lease, my house value has significantly decreased. I have paid £450 for an independent surveyor to value my house and he believes it has lost £40k in value. I’m sure the government ‘help to buy’ scheme won’t be happy that their loans are losing value?

Me and my husband are desperate to move to be nearer our jobs and yet we find ourselves trapped through no fault of our own

I ask for a non generic response within 7 working days with tangible actions on what you are going to do to rectify.

I look forward to hearing from you in due course.
Hannah Muldoon

 

---

Let us buy the freehold

One part of me thinks this is brilliant as it shows that TW have reviewed practices and made a change to protect people going forward. One part of me is devastated as why can’t we be treated the same. I will happily find 5,900 tomorrow to buy my freehold back. Give us that option. Please make this right, please.

Clair Scott

---

What about those of us on RPI ground rents? We have been scammed, too!

Dear Peter

Thank you for your prompt response on the 16th February regarding my property of in Hovey Close, Wheelock.

I am disappointed to hear that your review is only of those leaseholders with 10yr doubling rent clause – the fact that this is being done is an obvious admission of guilt on your part. However it’s disappointing to hear that you do not believe RPI leasehold needs to be reviewed too. In terms of exploitation and major financial loss for the purchase of our freehold, we are in exactly the same position as 10yr doubling ground rent lease holders. RPI linked leases are long established as you say, but in regards to flats not houses. This exploitation of homeowners is something that has only recently been occurring.

Your response does not provide me with any clarity. I am still in the same unknown position, facing a major financial loss and uncertainty to acquire what is legally mine. You and your company have put me in this position and I hold you accountable for this. The selling of my lease to investment companies, in exchange for a large amount of money for yourself, (without my knowledge) maybe “legal” however it is not morally right. I was falsely sold my property and was advised by your agents that the freehold could be purchased at any time – there was no caveats to this – I was not advised that the price would increase; that the freehold would be sold without our knowledge or consent; nor that I have become a glorified tenant in my own home. The mis-selling of my home and the unfair terms of my lease I believe contravene the Consumer Rights Act 2015 sections 61-69 in particular unfair terms of a contract (lease), an area which I intend to pursue further.

Thank you for you notes in reference to the legal advice that I received, do not worry this is an issue that I am already pursuing. However the light of blame is not shifted from you and your company – you started selling leasehold instead of freehold; you wrote the onerous leases and you sold the leases on for no other reason than greed.

You and your company have a moral responsibility to aid and assist us as leaseholders. This situation is not going to go away and we will continue to pursue until a satisfactory outcome is achieved.

Best regards

Jayne Edwards

---

I have an anonymous investor as a landlord who I have to pay for home improvements!

Hi Peter,

Thank you for your response.

Would it be possible for you to send me a copy of the contract you have? I have also requested this from my solicitor.

I must stress that I am extremely disappointed with the way in which this issue was handled by both TW and Bannister Preston. The terms of a ‘leasehold’ property were not clearly communicated by the sales agent or the solicitor. This is made even more confusing by the fact that I appear to have the wrong lease paperwork.

I fear that I will never truly own my own property as I was not given the chance to buy my lease and it has now been sold on to a company who have told me they do not wish to sell. They have informed me that they have ‘invested in my property for the long term’. I find it upsetting that I now have an investor whom is referred to as a landlord after paying £210k to class myself as a home owner.

I have to request permission from this ‘landlord’ to make home improvements to MY home!

May I ask why TW made the decision to sell the lease to a 3rd party rather than offering it to the ‘homeowners’ themselves?

TW customer service since the day I moved has been poor at best and I would never recommend them to anyone.

Do TW have a plan in place to work with their customers to provide a solution to the predicament we now find ourselves in?

Thank you in advance.

Kind Regards,

ASHLEIGH WILSON 

---

Every penny goes on the mortgage. How can I buy the freehold?

Sirs,

I am Anna Dobson. I live at 2 Wallbrook Avenue, Macclesfield, SK10 3GL, part of the Taylor Wimpey Jasmine Park estate. I bought my home in March 2011. I knew it was leasehold. I was told by the sales advisor, Molly, that we could buy the freehold at anytime and that it would cost 10 times the ground rent. We were never told that Taylor Wimpey would sell the lease to another company. I intended to pay ground rent for a few years then buy the freehold from them as advised by their sales advisor.

Due to a change in circumstances (relocation) I put my house for sale in Nov 2016. I accepted an offer and then found a new home to buy. I have instructed a solicitor and paid for searches as did my buyer. Contracts were drawn up for signing. On Monday 13th Feb, as she was about to sign, my buyer saw the “doubling ground rent” clause and pulled out of the sale. We were due to complete on Friday. 17th February. I have £2500 in solicitors fees for the sell and buy process. The property I was buying is a freehold new build, due to move in in 5 weeks. I have paid £1700 for upgrades plus a £250 deposit which I will also lose if I have to pull out of that purchase. I had booked a removal firm at a cost of £1000. I have lost all of this.

I have looked at buying the freehold now. People are being quoted £30k to £40k. I do not have this type of money. I have been paying a mortgage for 16 years in total. Every penny of equity I have is through mortgage repayments. It is all mine and I feel I have lost it all. I have never made any money through house price rises. There haven’t been any.

Given all of the bad publicity, since Nov 2016, surrounding this type of lease I have no faith that I will sell my home. The Government and Taylor Wimpey have added the final nail in the coffin with their press releases and commons debates. They have basically told the world that Taylor Wimpey doubling ground rent homes are a “ticking time bomb” and worthless. Taylor Wimpey have announced they have stopped selling leasehold. What message does that send out to the public? The message is that Taylor Wimpey leaseholds are bad news. Their CEO has said it himself. Pre November 2016 resale figures are worthless. It just shows people were ignorant. Post Nov 2016 resale figures will demonstrate the true impact of this scandal.

I have a house that is unsellable. I need to relocate for work, I have lost close to £6000, my son starts school in September and I have no idea what will happen to us. I have done nothing by cry since the sale fell through. I am devastated.

I have written to Taylor Wimpey and they say a review will be carried out by end April.

Can you establish what Taylor Wimpeys intentions are? Are they going to help us or say it is nothing to so with them? What are the government intending to do?

I await your response and any information you can obtain.

Anna Dobson

---

 

We are unable to sell because of your ground rent charges

Dear Mr Redfern,

My name is Andrea Leech. I bought a house from you on the Silver Birches development in Bolton in October 2011 (48 Silver Birch Close and 14th October 2011, to be precise). The house I bought is leasehold, and is tied to an especially onerous lease – one which doubles every ten years, starting at £295 p.a. and ending up at £9,440 p.a. in 2060 when the lease is fifty years old. I am sure you are well aware of the figures, however, as the doubling lease was your creation. Why?

I now find myself, with a young family, in a house that we are likely to outgrow, but are unable to sell due to your onerous lease. I find myself with a house that is not even worth what we bought it for in 2011 due to this onerous lease. I find myself in a house that wasn’t even worth in 2011 the price we paid for it due to this onerous lease. So, I face the prospect of remaining in this house with a ground rent that doubles every ten years. None of us are getting any younger, Mr Redfern, and if I am lucky enough to still be in this mortal world in fifty years’ time, I will be paying a ground rent of £9,440 annually out of a pension. Now, you may be able to afford that from your pension, as a CEO of a multi-billion-pound company, Mr Redfern, but I certainly will not be able to afford this. It is highly likely I will be dead before the lease hits the fifty-year anniversary, but that only passes on the problem to my children. Do you have children, Mr Redfern? Do you worry about their future? Do you have some comfort in knowing that when you are gone, you will leave them an inheritance that will provide them with some financial relief? I do not have that comfort.

So what do I do now? Try to buy the freehold? Believe me, this is something I would love to do. Unfortunately, I do not have a spare £46,000 lying around. Nor can I see a point in the future when I will have such a sum of money. I know that you were not asking such a colossal sum of money for the freehold, so why do the new freeholders think such a price is reasonable? It is because the terms of the onerous lease (that YOU created) is so lucrative for them. You knew this would happen, otherwise why would you have created such leases? You made these doubling leases knowing they would be irresistible to prospective companies whose business is based on buying the freehold from house builders such as yourselves. You have enslaved us, Mr Redfern. We are slaves to our freeholders. We cannot buy our freedom when the price is so high. Nor can we move to escape our enslavement, as who would buy such a leasehold house if made fully aware of the terms and implications of the lease. I was not offered the option of purchasing the freehold when I bought the house. I was also not made aware that you intended to sell on the land to a third party, who would use those of us on these onerous leases as a cash cow. Why did you not offer us, your customers, first refusal on purchasing the freehold? Why did you feel it was necessary to make just a few thousand pounds’ profit by selling on the freehold whilst leaving us, the ‘home owners’ in severe financial distress? What you have done, through the creation and selling on of these onerous leases, is immoral.

Do you have any understanding of the impact this lease is having on my life? Worrying about the future and how I am going to be able to afford the ground rent in my old age is constantly in my mind. The worry consumes me in the early hours of the morning when I am unable to sleep. During the day, it is there, hovering in the background, waiting for a quiet moment to spring forward and remind me of my captivity. The emotional stress is immeasurable. And what about the financial impact? I have already mentioned the inability to afford this ground rent in the future. So what will happen to me when I default on the ground rent? Will I be evicted? Will my home be repossessed by the freeholders? Can you imagine the bad publicity when I, and my neighbours – all well into our seventies and eighties – are evicted? Maybe you can, but you have washed your hands of this by selling on the land without offering us the opportunity to purchase our freehold and thus avoid an uncertain retirement. I repeat, again, this is immoral.

So this is the point where you pass the blame onto the solicitors who acted for me at the time of purchase, isn’t it? Solicitors recommended by your staff, I might add. And, yes, they are culpable. That is another avenue to be pursued. However, had YOU not created such leases, this would not be an issue. And that is the bottom line, here – YOU are responsible for the terms of the lease. It was YOUR idea to draw up these doubling leases. I ask again, why? Why did you do this? Traditionally, ground rent was always a peppercorn rent – a symbolic, token gesture. What reason, other than greed, was there for your decision to change the terms of leases to something more onerous and exploitative? I know you will argue that you have done nothing wrong; that within the letter of the law, you have done nothing illegal. Well, it was once legal to own slaves in this country, but it was still immoral. I want to know what you propose to do to help those of us enslaved by the terms of these leases? How will you atone for your actions? This is an issue that is not going to go away. I have to live with the implications of this onerous lease every single day. I look forward to your reply, directly and specifically addressing my concerns, with your resolutions within 10 working days.

Yours faithfully,
Andrea Leech

---

Why did you sell us a lease which you knew was going to leave us unable to sell our own home?

Dear Mr Redfern
It has recently been brought to my attention that due to specific clauses in the lease of the property I purchased from yourselves, I now own a property that I am unable to sell and unable to afford to buy the freehold for, specifically my ground rent doubles every 10 years.
Property: 44 Silver Birch Close, Bolton, BL6 4GF
Purchased: December 2011

I would like answers to several questions;

Why did you sell on a lease which you knew was going to leave the leaseholder unable to sell their own home?

Why was the leasehold changed in 2012 to an RPI linked scheme?

When was I notified of the sale of lease transfer to Adriatic land and please can you provide me with a copy of this notification?

Why was I never given the option to purchase the freehold with any of my meeting with Taylor Wimpey when I bought the property?

Please confirm what you are currently reviewing in relation to the national scandal and timeframe expected?

This whole situation has had a significant impact on both my social and professional life as being in this position is very stressful and worrying both emotionally and financially.

Due to the terms of the lease being so significant and morally wrong this is something I feel needs to be rectified and I have no alternative but to pursue a satisfactory resolution for all parties which I will continue to do.

I would be grateful of a response within the next 10 calendar days.
Yours Sincerely

Danielle Wallwork

---

 

Earlier reply from Pete Redfern, Taylor Wimpey

Thank you for your email on 31 January relating to your property at 35 Speakman Way, Prescot.

As you may be aware, following concerns raised by a small number of customers, Taylor Wimpey began reviewing, in November 2016, the leasehold structures that it used historically on sites started between 2007 and 2011. Our review is not complete, as this is a complex and historic issue, and the situation for individual customers is different. However, I can share some of our initial conclusions with you.

The type of lease used on the Speakman Gardens development was introduced in good faith in March 2007, at a time when inflation history and economic projections were very different from those in 2011 when we stopped using it. During this time, Taylor Wimpey and the economy, and the financial markets generally, were going through an unprecedented level of change, and a variety of ground rent mechanisms – including doubling terms – were in widespread use across the industry. It is also pertinent to advise that Taylor Wimpey also routinely carries out mortgage due diligence before changing its selling proposition.

In 2007, historic retail price index (RPI) measures had averaged 5.9% per annum over the previous 50 years, and RPI in 2007 was 4.4%. In a lease with doubling ground rent terms, the inflation implicit in the first 50 years was 7% per annum. However, over the life of the lease, as the doubling stops and is capped at the 50th anniversary of the lease, the average inflation was c.1.4% per annum on a 250 year lease, or c. 2.8% on 125 year lease. This was significantly lower than most long-term predictions for RPI at the time. The expectation was therefore that whilst these leases with doubling ground rents were projected to be slightly more expensive in the initial 50 years, once capped after that period they would in fact be less expensive in the later years of the term of the lease.

In 2011, we undertook a review of our ground rent structures. By this point, house prices had declined sharply and were only just starting to recover. RPI had also fallen and economists were at the early stages of considering this as a potentially long-term trend. In this changed environment, and following our review, we established RPI leases across all new sites that we developed after 2011 as standard practice across all of our business units.

We have reviewed the detail of the lease used at this time and are satisfied that the rent review provisions are worded simply and clearly in the lease and are contained prominently in the first clause under the rent review heading.

We would expect all solicitors to explain both the leasehold nature of a property, and the terms of any rent reviews to their clients, along with any other key terms of the lease. If you have any concerns about the legal advice you received when you purchased your property or any questions about your lease, we would suggest that you speak to the conveyancing solicitor you used for the transaction in order to discuss this.

We have examined trends on developments where these leases were used, and have observed that there has continued to be normal patterns of sales, mortgages and remortgages over the last ten years and to date. We do not, therefore, believe that there is evidence of a widespread issue with saleability or mortgageability. However, if there are any specific documents or indications you have had which suggest that your property is unsellable, please do send these on to us at your earliest convenience.

We have checked our files, and can confirm that the attached NHBC Buildmark Cover Note was issued for your property. A copy of this was sent to your solicitor with the Notice to Complete on 28 September 2010. If you do not have this note or have any additional questions, we recommend that you contact the NHBC directly.

I hope this email goes some way to answering your questions and we will look forward to receiving any documents you are able to send us.

Kind regards,

Pete Redfern

---

I put my dead late mother’s money into this our dream home …

Dear Mr Redfern

My wife and I purchased a Taylor Wimpey home at Silver Birch Close in Lostock Bolton in April 2012.
We bought the house as our dream home for myself, my wife and our 2 children, a third child was on the way in the May of the same year.
We enlisted Banister Preston as our solicitor as they were recommended by yourselves to carry out the legal work.
The house was purchased by ourselves as our family home and also as an investment for the future of both ourselves and our children. We invested the money we had inherited from my late father’s estate following his death in 2009. We put all our savings and inheritance into buying this property plus a commitment to a large mortgage as well.

We are now in a position where we were not fully advised when we bought the house that we were on a lease that doubled each 10 years up to 50 years or advised of the effects of that doubling ground rent on our property, to add insult to injury I have just found out that even though my home was not built until 2012, the lease began in 2010 which means the doubling will come soon than we envisaged.
Can you please explain in your response to myself, how my lease could begin before my house was even built? More importantly can you explain how Taylor Wimpey could create such a leasehold situation which ultimately devalues our home and makes it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to sell?

The position we now find ourselves in is shown in the below table, which means in 50 years’ time we would have paid £91450 in ground rent which is over 20% of what we paid for the house. Therefore our dream home has now become a nightmare whereby if we stay in this house we will be in severe financial distress and if we try to sell we have been advised that we would be either lucky to sell the house anyway or we would have to make a substantial loss to cover the costs that you have inflicted on us. I have already had 2 valuations which have valued the house up to 10% less than which we paid for it.

Per Year
Cost every 10 years
0-10 Years
£295
£2950
10-20 Years
£590
£5900
20-30 Years
£1180
£11800
30-40 Years
£2360
£23600
40-50 Years
£4720
£47200
Total

£91450
We were not offered the chance to buy the lease when we bought the house and now it would seem if we wish to buy the lease then this would now cost in excess of £40k which we obviously can’t afford. Some on the estate were offered to buy the lease at time of buying which most turned down due to already being stretched to buy the houses, however all were not informed that Taylor Wimpey would sell on the land and that they would not have the right to buy it again at a later date at a fair price. We would now have to go through a costly tribunal to barter the price down.

Our dream home has now turned into a nightmare and our options are very limited.
I would therefore like you to respond to me within 10 working days to explain why you decided to sell houses with these leases on which would ultimately leave the property holder in severe financial distress.
Can you please also advise what mitigations you are putting in place to address the situation and making this right as the stress of this is affecting our lives. We are now unsure of our financial futures not just as a family but of what should have been my 3 children’s inheritance.

I would appreciate your swift reply as I am now in the position where I need financial stability to our lives once again.

Regards
Gary Wood

---

We were advised not to buy freehold by Taylor Wimpey staff

Peter,

Thank you for your reply…

I am still not happy that we were not fully informed about the whole lease process by your sales advisor.

We were not told of any increases to the annual ground rent. We were actually advised against buying freehold.

Your Sales advisor -Louise -actually used a calculator to demonstrate how many years we would need to stay to make a flat £295 pa worth it.

We were told we could buy the freehold from you in the future. First refusal.

We were not told that Taylor Wimpey would auction off the land and we would be at the mercy of landlords who can charge what they like for planning permission, queries, enfranchisement.

We feel let down and cheated.

Why is it that you are now producing a one pager to clearly explain to buyers the leasehold process? I would have like this clarity from you when we were purchasing. E.g. Norlands Green , Widnes development current documents.

Why are you no longer looking to sell houses as leasehold?

We have not been informed of the whole facts.

Again such a shame as we like the actual build of the house.

We are feeling that we need to move to get out of this nightmare situation. Yet buyers are wary of buying these Taylor Wimpey properties… we are trapped.

I bought this house as an investment for our children.

This is causing us as a family much distress.

I await your reply on how we can purchase the freehold at the price it was when we bought the property.
This would be ideal end to this mess.

Regards
Michelle Halliwell.

---

And from Taylor Wimpey … ‘We are taking this very seriously’

From: Peter Redfern – TW Head Office [mailto:Peter.Redfern@taylorwimpey.com]
Sent: 16 February 2017 13:45
Subject: FW: Letter Peter Redfern to Leasehold and Commonhold APPG dated 14.12.16

Dear Ms Jones,

Thank you for your email dated 14 February regarding your property at Waters Edge.

We do understand your concerns and I would like to reassure you that we are taking this matter very seriously.

In November, following notification from a small number of customers, we started a review of the leasehold structures Taylor Wimpey historically employed on some sites started between 2007 and 2011. We have focused our review on homes that Taylor Wimpey sold to customers that have a 10 year doubling ground rent clause. Your lease is therefore part of our review and the points raised in your email about your lease will be taken on board as part of this process.

This is a complex matter concerning a number of customers and it is important that we do a thorough and complete review in order to assess fully how we may be able to help. We are gathering together our own company information, and information from customers, as well as seeking input from experts and lenders in order to fully understand issues around valuation, saleability and mortgageability. In addition, we are also aware of the work being undertaken by the Government on this issue and wish to understand their future plans for leaseholds.

I do understand that this does not provide you with the answers you are looking for at this point. We are, however, making good progress with our review and plan to come back to you by the end of April with more information.

I note that you also raised issues regarding purchasing the freehold to your property. We will pass this on to the relevant Business Unit and they will come back to you regarding this point in due course.

We will be back in touch either with a significant update or when our review is complete.

Yours sincerely,

Pete Redfern

---

But we are still going to sell leasehold house, says Taylor Wimpey

(You might struggle with that, says LKP)

Ian Smith | Managing Director | Taylor Wimpey North West
Thank you for your recent enquiry via email (attached below) about the sale of leasehold homes by Taylor Wimpey.

We have recently confirmed that on all new Taylor Wimpey developments which start on site after 1st January 2017 houses will be sold freehold.

This does not apply to sites which were started before that date where homes have already been constructed and sold to customers on a leasehold basis where we have decided to sell the remaining homes on the same basis as those sold to date.

Taylor Wimpey currently sells leasehold properties across all sites in the North West and in North Wales. Most other major national home builders do the same in this area of the country.
The Taylor Wimpey lease provides for the payment of a ground rent which starts at £295 per year and is reviewed every 10 years in line with the Retail Prices Index (RPI).
Much of the press or media coverage which you may have seen recently relates to leases which were in use between 2007 and 2011 where the ground rent doubled every 10 years up to year 50 and then stayed the same after that. Taylor Wimpey no longer uses that type of lease.

In circumstances where customers do not purchase the freehold directly (at the quoted cost of £5,900) we have until recently sold freeholds once a year to selected third parties who invest in freeholds for the longer term. As an example, last year we sold freeholds to Aviva plc, a major pensions, insurance and investment company.
This means that the ground rent becomes payable to another party (not Taylor Wimpey) but the terms of the lease remain exactly the same including the part which relates to the future review of the ground rent in line with RPI.

Previously we have undertaken not to sell the freehold for the first three months after legal completion but we have recently reviewed our policy in this matter. For new sales or sales taken in 2016 the time period for which Taylor Wimpey now undertakes to retain ownership of the freehold is 5 years.

This allows customers a longer period of time to buy the freehold themselves if they choose to do so. The cost of the freehold will stay the same (i.e. £5,900) throughout the 5 year period.

The above summary covers only some aspects of purchasing a leasehold property from Taylor Wimpey but hopefully includes the main points about which you were requesting clarification. In the meantime your solicitor should be able to give you appropriate advice about all of the legal aspects of buying a leasehold property.
If you have any further queries or concerns please do not hesitate to contact us.

Yours sincerely,

---

 
£590 ground rent ‘hidden’ in the lease

Dear Mr Redfern,

My name is Siobhan Dickerson and I live with my fiancé at your Taylor Wimpey Millgate development in Ramswell Close, Bolton.

I purchased this property when single as a first time buyer in 2009. I was sold on the house: the deal made was good, and the sales lady was very keen to get me to sign, indeed offering lots of incentives to help me in my decision and my financial position as a first time buyer, including free carpets, a financial adviser and the use of your recommended solicitor, Foreshaw Davies Ridgway. I was advised to use your Deposit Match scheme too and with this in place, I purchased the property in October 2009. At no point was any ground rent made clear to me, nor was I told that I did not own the land my house was on. I was told this house was mine forever.

For the next two years, no ground rent was collected from me. I then received a letter stating that I owed two payments, so paid this in full to a new company. I continued to pay the £295 ground rent each year, to the new company (who purchased the leases from yourselves without my being giving the opportunity to purchase it myself, or without reiterating any terms of the lease and its doubling clause). This November, I received a letter telling me the ground rent would increase to £590. As you can imagine, I was horrified: this was definitely not ten years after my purchase and was definitely not anywhere near the rpi. Upon telephoning the ground rent company, I was told that there was no negotiation and that the ground rent was in my contract. There was no opportunity to pay in instalments and no rationalisation as to the reason why the rent had doubled.

Upon looking at my contract of sale, the line about ground rent is so small and unclear and was definitely not pointed out to me by either the sales team at your development nor by your recommended (and funded) solicitor.

I am happy in our house and always thought I would only move in the future to get a bigger property. Now I feel I need to move as quickly as possible so as to avoid this scandalous £600 annual charge.

However, I am now stuck in a property that is unsellable. One flat sale has fallen through and at least two houses on our street cannot sell. We ourselves are getting married this August and finding the ground rent (and the equally wasteful monthly service charge) is extremely stressful and having a negative impact on our lives. £600 is an exorbitant sum to find, especially when it is due at New Year.

Can we ask why the leases were sold by yourselves without our knowledge or without giving us the option to purchase them? I know our neighbours are wanting to now purchase their freehold but my fiancé and I simply want a fair rate each year, without the onerous doubling clause AND to be able to sell our property for at least the price we paid for it. We have looked at other TW properties in different locations and have been encouraged to use your Easymover scheme: I wonder if this will work when surveyors find out about the ground rent? Even so, we won’t be moving to another TW site where ground rent exists. We have seen that your Rossendale and Blackley sites are still doing ground rents despite various publicity for TW saying otherwise.

This situation has had a hugely stressful impact on my fiancé and I. We find ourselves working our usual long hours and then researching ground rent cases and attending residents’ meetings and sending group emails in the evenings. We find ourselves in a difficult situation financially, personally and emotionally but we will be pursuing further the involvement of your company in this situation until an acceptable resolution is provided. I have previously had a response from TW saying we should look to question instead the ground rent company and the solicitor I used to purchase the company. As I am only involved with both through you, I am looking to you for answers and for recompense. The house was sold to me by Taylor Wimpey. I feel hoodwinked and cheated by what I thought was a reputable company: I feel it is up to you to either allay these fears with a financial recompense or purchase my property from me at full valuation price – something which potential buyers will not do due to the very nature of the this scandalous clause, which you have previously stated does not affect the resale valuation of your properties.

I will look to hear from you within 10 working days, addressing my concerns and providing me with a response on what you propose to do to address the issues you have caused.

Kind regards,

Siobhan Dickerson

---

We can’t sell. So, how will I pay £9,440pa ground rent on a pension?

Dear Mr Redfern,

My name is Andrea Leech. I bought a house from you on the Silver Birches development in Bolton in October 2011. The house I bought is leasehold, and is tied to an especially onerous lease – one which doubles every ten years, starting at £295 p.a. and ending up at £9,440 p.a. in 2060 when the lease is fifty years old. I am sure you are well aware of the figures, however, as the doubling lease was your creation. Why?

I now find myself, with a young family, in a house that we are likely to outgrow, but are unable to sell due to your onerous lease. I find myself with a house that is not even worth what we bought it for in 2011 due to this onerous lease. I find myself in a house that wasn’t even worth in 2011 the price we paid for it due to this onerous lease. So, I face the prospect of remaining in this house with a ground rent that doubles every ten years. None of us are getting any younger, Mr Redfern, and if I am lucky enough to still be in this mortal world in fifty years’ time, I will be paying a ground rent of £9,440 annually out of a pension. Now, you may be able to afford that from your pension, as a CEO of a multi-billion-pound company, Mr Redfern, but I certainly will not be able to afford this. It is highly likely I will be dead before the lease hits the fifty-year anniversary, but that only passes on the problem to my children. Do you have children, Mr Redfern? Do you worry about their future? Do you have some comfort in knowing that when you are gone, you will leave them an inheritance that will provide them with some financial relief? I do not have that comfort.

So what do I do now? Try to buy the freehold? Believe me, this is something I would love to do. Unfortunately, I do not have a spare £46,000 lying around. Nor can I see a point in the future when I will have such a sum of money. I know that you were not asking such a colossal sum of money for the freehold, so why do the new freeholders think such a price is reasonable? It is because the terms of the onerous lease (that YOU created) is so lucrative for them. You knew this would happen, otherwise why would you have created such leases? You made these doubling leases knowing they would be irresistible to prospective companies whose business is based on buying the freehold from house builders such as yourselves. You have enslaved us, Mr Redfern. We are slaves to our freeholders. We cannot buy our freedom when the price is so high. Nor can we move to escape our enslavement, as who would buy such a leasehold house if made fully aware of the terms and implications of the lease. I was not offered the option of purchasing the freehold when I bought the house. I was also not made aware that you intended to sell on the land to a third party, who would use those of us on these onerous leases as a cash cow. Why did you not offer us, your customers, first refusal on purchasing the freehold? Why did you feel it was necessary to make just a few thousand pounds’ profit by selling on the freehold whilst leaving us, the ‘home owners’ in severe financial distress? What you have done, through the creation and selling on of these onerous leases, is immoral.

Do you have any understanding of the impact this lease is having on my life? Worrying about the future and how I am going to be able to afford the ground rent in my old age is constantly in my mind. The worry consumes me in the early hours of the morning when I am unable to sleep. During the day, it is there, hovering in the background, waiting for a quiet moment to spring forward and remind me of my captivity. The emotional stress is immeasurable. And what about the financial impact? I have already mentioned the inability to afford this ground rent in the future. So what will happen to me when I default on the ground rent? Will I be evicted? Will my home be repossessed by the freeholders? Can you imagine the bad publicity when I, and my neighbours – all well into our seventies and eighties – are evicted? Maybe you can, but you have washed your hands of this by selling on the land without offering us the opportunity to purchase our freehold and thus avoid an uncertain retirement. I repeat, again, this is immoral.

So this is the point where you pass the blame onto the solicitors who acted for me at the time of purchase, isn’t it? Solicitors recommended by your staff, I might add. And, yes, they are culpable. That is another avenue to be pursued. However, had YOU not created such leases, this would not be an issue. And that is the bottom line, here – YOU are responsible for the terms of the lease. It was YOUR idea to draw up these doubling leases. I ask again, why? Why did you do this? Traditionally, ground rent was always a peppercorn rent – a symbolic, token gesture. What reason, other than greed, was there for your decision to change the terms of leases to something more onerous and exploitative? I know you will argue that you have done nothing wrong; that within the letter of the law, you have done nothing illegal. Well, it was once legal to own slaves in this country, but it was still immoral. I want to know what you propose to do to help those of us enslaved by the terms of these leases? How will you atone for your actions? This is an issue that is not going to go away. I have to live with the implications of this onerous lease every single day. I look forward to your reply, directly and specifically addressing my concerns, with your resolutions within 10 working days.

Yours faithfully,
Andrea Leech

---

If doubling ground rents were OK, why Taylor Wimpey end this base profiteering off of other people’s misery?

 Dear Mr Redfern,

I write to you with regards to the home I bought from yourselves in December 2008. I’m sure you know after having many other E-mails from thousands of other people around the country in a similar position, what this E-mail is in regards to; and that is the sales you made between 2007-11 in particular the extremely deceitful and unbelievably extortionate clause you placed on my lease.

That no, wasn’t explained to me with regards to the difficulty I could have in not only selling my house in the future for a fair price, but also in even re-mortgaging my property at any given date.

This was never explained by YOUR sales staff at any point during the purchase, nor the solicitor Taylor Wimpey INSISTED I use to access its first time buyer package. If this was explained to me from the outset I like many others would’ve have ran a mile.

What you did is sold people houses for full current market value knowing full well you were selling them properties that will never appreciate let alone break even due to the oppressive doubling ground rent clause you have placed within the lease. Mr Redfern, believe you me as a first time buyer in 2008 I had the pick of the housebuilder when making my purchase and I chose Taylor Wimpey as I thought they were a reliable and ethical builder, when as it turns out this opinion couldn’t be any further from the truth.

You have left me in a position whereby to own the land my home is built on it would cost me in excess of 30 THOUSAND pounds. It’s not my only choice to get out of this nightmare but my other two are equally as bad.

I can either carry on paying the doubling rent eventually it will peak at £5’600 pounds per annum and remain so meaning that if I am still alive I will have paid in ground rent alone £110’250 by 2068, thus being placed essentially in a perpetual mortgage. Is this acceptable to you? As it certainly isn’t acceptable to me. My last choice is to sell the property at 20-30% below market value because your onerous clause is artificially deflating its value. so either way without resolution I take a hit that market forces are not determining but your clause is.

I notice that you told Sir Peter Bottomley MP that Taylor Wimpey stopped this practice of double ground rent clauses in 2011, and switched to the less lucrative RPI clause, Why?

If it was above board and sound practice you would have still did these type of leases as you know with such clauses you get more money when you sell these type of leases to long term investors as its a recession proof investment. At its most basic level its profiteering off of other people’s misery. The cynic in me believes you inserted these clauses so when you sold the land you could sell it at a premium thus inflating your shareholder profits during the downturn in the housing market.

Sir Peter asked you further if these properties needed to be sold as leasehold at all?I ask did they? As since the turn of the year you now only sell freehold properties in most if not all cases, why is this when there’s additional money to be made in leases have you suddenly had the suspicion that this is eventually going to explode into a national scandal?

In February, you wrote to homeowners also stung in your profiteering at your speakman gardens site stating that you will either have a full resolution at the end of April or at least a significant update. Are you committed to accepting that regardless of the other players in this game you played, that ultimately the buck stops with Taylor Wimpey for including these clauses within the leases. Are you willing to assist homeowners that you’ve heaped this additional financial pressure on, by either compensating or assisting them in buying their land at a fair price?

Peter I want to tell you how this has personally affected me, as I think you need to appreciate the human cost to all this and look beyond figures on a spreadsheet. Since coming to the realisation about this issue on February 14th it has knocked me for six, I am going through panic and anxiety attacks, as I have no security going forward in future years I have two small innocent children that do not deserve this as it will be them who will ultimately lose out. I cannot believe your company a large national housebuilder could do something so underhanded as this mis-selling practice which is really what this is. We watch people on shows like rogue traders never thinking that large companies with public images such as yours would do this. If Taylor Wimpey was a one man band tradesman you’d have been hauled before the courts by now. As somebody said, you didn’t build homes during these years you built family prisons.

I know that there are many groups forming on social media to fight this, they like me will not go away I am determined that my children will not suffer because their father had the wool pulled over his eyes by an unscrupulous business. I am leaving it here for now as going over it again is making things difficult for me.

I look forward to hearing your reply with hopefully some positive news.

Stephen McGowan

---

Horrified that saleability of my property is affected

My property is subject to a doubling ground rent clause; the implications of which are becoming widely publicised as I’m sure you are aware, and I was horrified to learn what exactly this means for me and the property I believed I owned. The worry of the spiralling ground rent and potential saleability of my home has caused me undue distress; I am a ordinary young person who worked hard to purchase my first home – I was extremely proud of this achievement but now it feels more like a burden around my neck. I am shocked I am not a home owner as I thought but a tenant. I feel trapped and am constantly worrying how on earth I will be able to sell the property or afford the £9440 yearly ground rent I will be liable for in years to come. This has even affected plans to start a family as it is essential for me to understand how this will be resolved before I can do this; as it stands I’m frightened to leave any children with such a burden.

 

Buying the freehold is not an option either. There are quotes of over £40,000 to purchase the lease plus costs – a situation you will have been aware you were putting your customers in when Taylor Wimpey opted to sell homes as leasehold and selling the leases on. These sums are far out of reach for many normal home owners. How can this be justified as anything as a money spinning exercise with no regards for your customers? Of course the conveyancing solicitors have their part to play in this matter but ultimately the responsibility lies with Taylor Wimpey for writing such clauses and selling these homes in this unscrupulous way, knowing full well how misunderstood the matter of leasehold and these onerous clauses would be.

 

I urge you to make this right for us and I look forward to the results of your review in April. 

 

Kind regards,

Jessica Li