Lawyers have contacted the Guardian newspaper to say that buyers of new-build houses and flats with crippling ground rent clauses could take legal action.
The full article can be read here
Graham Balchin, of solicitors Carter Lemon Camerons says: “It is a requirement of most lenders [see the CML Handbook section 5.14.9] that the lender is informed of any increase in the ground rent that may materially affect the value of the property.
“If the conveyancing solicitor fails to warn the purchaser, and any lender providing a mortgage secured on the property, that the lease terms may adversely affect the value of the leasehold property, they may be liable in negligence.”
The Guardian says that many young buyers are encouraged by developers to use solicitors for conveyancing recommended by them, who then fail to warn the buyer of the onerous ground rent clauses.
The newspaper reports Sir Peter Bottomley asking Taylor Wimpey whether there is “any reason to sell a new house leasehold except to put the new owner at a disadvantage”.
It notes that Taylor Wimpey CEO Pete Redfern has indicated that the company is “undertaking a review” into ground rent clauses, particularly those on properties sold between 2007 and 2011.
The newspaper reports LKP’s finding that nearly £2bn of new-build leasehold houses were sold in England and Wales last year.
Related posts:
Guardian sticks with new-build ground rent scandal, while LKP advises Persimmon home buyers to walk away
Guardian’s Patrick Collinson welcomes Nationwide exploding the ground rent scandal
Guardian reports the Taylor Wimpey £130m offer to settle ground rent scandal
Guardian reports the Blythe Court ground rent scandal
Fill in our survey to demonstrate the new-build ground rent scandal
Taylor Wimpey CEO says doubling ground rent scandal under ‘review’. But Bottomley asks: ‘Have innocent homebuyers been shafted?’
All the more reason for Taylor Wimpey to settle this now.
Before the Legal Profession gets involved, costs escalate and reputation is tarnished for ever..
But for the “oxygen of publicity” afforded by campaigning sites such as this one, what chance would individual leaseholders have of overturning something that is so manifestly unfair?
Thank you Carl;ex and LKP
Exactly! If it wasn’t for the publicity leaseholders are lambs for the slaughter.. It seems clear that what is needed here is sweeping legislation, so this kind of injustice is not allowed to happen in the first place.
Also WIMPEY may still have some interest in maintening a reputation, – many others could not give a rats ass for their reputation, they just want the money. Naming and shaming is not a solution.
Michael, their reputation is already Tarnished. It’s rather like Phillip Greens ‘ Bauble’ . The best they can do is splash the cash to buy the freeholds back for the leaseholders otherwise the British Public should demonstrate outside their officies. This to me requires poll tax demonstration unless these unscrupulous outfits pay up. Incidentally, I have not been personally affected but smart incensed at the injustice of it all.
I have said this few weeks ago. If you go back I have said that legal action must be taken by the leaseholders against the solicitors who acted on purchase of these lease. That is the simplest route.
NO ‘Interested’. ACTION must be taken against the unscrupulous FREEHOLDERS/ SPIVS who buy the ground rent to extort money from leaseholders who are wet behind the ears. Additionally, the dishonest managing agents employed by the spivs should get a kick up the jacksi and impressed if there is commited fraud. DRAIN THE SWAMP!!!!!!!!!
IMPRISONED.! Typo