Shared Freehold - LPE1 issue

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Shared Freehold - LPE1 issue

    I'm currently in the process of selling a leasehold first floor flat where the freehold is shared with the leaseholder of the ground floor flat.

    I've accepted an offer on the flat and have reached the stage where the buyer has requested the LPE1 form be completed. My solicitor has advised me that both landlords would need to sign this form. I have completed the information and sent the LPE1 to the joint-freeholder requesting a signature, but they have now replied to both me and my solicitor to say they won't sign it as they've been advised they shouldn't sign it, and that it is unnecessary anyway. My solicitor has suggested the buyer would be somewhat suspicious if only I were to sign the form.

    My query is, is there anything that compels the joint-freeholder to be agreeable in this matter? As far as I can tell the LPE1 form doesn't contain anything provocative - both flats have ground rent and service charge of zero, building insurance is arranged on an annual basis with us both sharing the cost etc - so I'm at a loss as to what 'advice' they've received.

    #2
    The question is a broader one - because there is nothing to stop standalone freeholders from bullying or abusing lessees in this manner (and indeed artificially suppressing prices of leases which they then purchases themselves directly or via proxy). It is fraud, happens regularly, and legislators don't care.

    The failure to sign **is** however providing your buyer with useful information -- that they are purchasing a lease which involves a problematical freeholder.

    Comment


      #3
      It seems a somewhat short-sighted approach to take as the joint-freeholder must be aware that such a stance is extremely likely to be reciprocated at whatever point they decide to sell their interest in the property.

      Theoretically, we could now both be sitting on a worthless asset (from a sales perspective), unless there is legislation which compels a freeholder to co-operate.

      Comment


        #4
        LPE1 has no statutory significance and there is no law requiring the freeholder to even respond to it.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by leaseholder64 View Post
          LPE1 has no statutory significance and there is no law requiring the freeholder to even respond to it.
          Thanks for clarifying.

          Does the same hold true of the TR1 form?

          Comment


            #6
            TR1 is a Land Registry form. As such I guess it is covered by tertiary legislation. However, I think that primary and secondary legislation only refers to the actual registration, not to the documents used to achieve it.

            It looks to me that failing to submit it within 2 months voids the transaction, but any action for failure of the seller to complete it would have to be in terms of a breach of their contract to sell. Generally both parties have an interest in the form's being completed promptly, whereas LPE1 is a chore for the freeholder.

            Please don't take this as gospel.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by leaseholder64 View Post
              LPE1 has no statutory significance and there is no law requiring the freeholder to even respond to it.
              Indeed. But that doesn't help OP and rather compounds the problem. The buyer expects information. No sensible buyer would proceed without information from the horse's mouth. I would not.

              So information is required, but it is supplied at the whim of the horse (unless the lease obliges). The thing is a dog's breakfast.

              Comment


                #8
                If you are selling your 50% interest in the freehold title and held as "tenants in common" to your buyer , why do you need the signature of the other 50% owner whose interest is not being transferred to your buyer?

                Comment


                  #9
                  LPE1 relates to the leasehold and is an enquiry to the freeholder.

                  I don't believe it has been said that the freehold share is also being sold, although I thought that the situation generally was that both tenants in common must agree agree and the Land Registry entry will be flagged with a marker to that effect. As I understand it, it is actually a trust that owns the property, even if the forms allow the individual trustees to be listed , when there are not large numbers.

                  Comment

                  Latest Activity

                  Collapse

                  • service charge based on rateable values
                    Foreverleaseholder
                    I own a leasehold flat in a building of 4 flats - different sizes, mine is the smallest-almost a studio flat (3 leasehold flats + 1 freeholder’s flat).
                    Since I bought the flat the freeholder has been calculating the service charge by simply dividing the costs four ways.
                    Very recently...
                    20-04-2018, 10:40 AM
                  • Reply to service charge based on rateable values
                    Lawcruncher
                    That reads like a summary of the clause and does not quite make sense. Please quote the exact wording. In the meantime, assuming the effect of the clause is that each flat pays a proportion according to rateable value and does not elaborate further, then I think you have to go by the rateable values...
                    21-04-2018, 21:03 PM
                  • Director Issues
                    amog78
                    I own a share of the Freehold. There are 24 flats in the complex, 16 of which took up the opportunity to purchase the freehold, including myself. The remaining 8 flats are Leasehold and therefore pay Ground Rent and Service Charge. Our Directors have recently decided that the Ground Rent paid by the...
                    21-04-2018, 16:57 PM
                  • Reply to Director Issues
                    leaseholder64
                    That should, of course, have been corporation, not cooperation, tax, as no-one wants to cooperate in paying tax!

                    As well as corporation tax, those receiving the dividends would need to declare them on their tax returns, although it is possible that they would be below the dividend threshold....
                    21-04-2018, 18:52 PM
                  • Ground Rent Term 2 question
                    KarenL
                    Hi,

                    I've been reading this forum for quite some time and found it to be REALLY useful. We have 4 houses which we rent out, so thanks for all the posts.

                    I thought I would ask my first question as I have googled this and can't find anything.

                    One of our properties...
                    21-04-2018, 13:08 PM
                  • Reply to Ground Rent Term 2 question
                    KarenL
                    Thank you so much for that.

                    Just one (maybe silly) question.
                    Why is it £1 and not £25 (which is the real ground rent).

                    Oh and the reason for all this is that the landlord/freeholder has asked for almost £5,000. All our enquiries have shown it to be around £350
                    21-04-2018, 18:15 PM
                  • Reply to Director Issues
                    leaseholder64
                    Also, how is the cost of, at least, filing confirmation statements being funded, if not from the ground rents?

                    You also still have to pay service charges.
                    21-04-2018, 17:10 PM
                  • Reply to Director Issues
                    leaseholder64
                    All 24 flats are still leasehold.

                    Buying out he freehold doesn't change the leases, so you still have to pay ground rent.

                    You are confusing the members of the company that owns the freehold, with the freeholder. The company is the one and only freeholder.

                    I think...
                    21-04-2018, 17:07 PM
                  • Costs to get FTT decision on the terms of collective enfranchisement
                    Lorimer
                    We are in the middle of a Section 13 collective enfranchisement claim to purchase our freehold. The freeholder's counter notice stated that he wanted more money than we offered and also stated that we are not entitled to include the large communal garden to the side of the building in our enfranchisement...
                    16-04-2018, 09:26 AM
                  • Reply to Costs to get FTT decision on the terms of collective enfranchisement
                    Lorimer
                    1. The garden is on the same freehold title as the building in which the flats are located.
                    2. Leaseholders have paid grounds maintenance monies over the course of c.20 years for the upkeep of the garden.

                    We have been advised that the garden cannot be classed as appurtenant land because...
                    21-04-2018, 15:58 PM
                  Working...
                  X