Can you Extend a Lease Twice?

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

  • Richardo
    replied
    Jeffrey

    I take your point but there are a couple of LVT decisions (ours included) whereby MV is deemed to exist >80 years but has to be disregarded.

    Hopefully this post will be useful to anyone in the same boat we were. If I had had your knowledge then we would have pushed the issue.

    Very many thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • jeffrey
    replied
    Originally posted by Richardo View Post
    Hi Jeffrey

    The LVT in its wisdom put considerable weight on s.128 of the 2002 amendments.

    (2A) Where at the relevant date the unexpired term of the lease held by any of those participating members exceeds eighty years, any increase in the value of the freehold or any intermediate leasehold interest in the specified premises which is attributable to his potential ability to have a new lease granted to him as mentioned in sub-paragraph (2)(a) is to be ignored."

    Fs have (sucesssfully) claimed in a number of LVTs that the above paragraph confirms MV exists above 80 years and hence a relativity exists the second after midnight on the 79th year remaining. In our case a whole lot of relativity graphs were produced supporting this claim.

    Whilst i'm not convinced the LVT decisions are correct, we got our CE for £5k against the £13K the F wanted, so we were more than happy with this, especially as it was a DIY job.
    Yes. Glad to hear that you came through OK.

    BUT s.128 of 2002 Act amended para. 4 of Schedule 6 to 1993 Act. That Schedule is headed "Freeholder's share of marriage value".

    It did NOT affect Schedule 13 to 1993 Act. Result: freeholder might well have an increased share of MV, but MV=0. Even twice nil is still nil!

    Leave a comment:


  • Richardo
    replied
    Hi Jeffrey

    The LVT in its wisdom put considerable weight on s.128 of the 2002 amendments.

    (2A) Where at the relevant date the unexpired term of the lease held by any of those participating members exceeds eighty years, any increase in the value of the freehold or any intermediate leasehold interest in the specified premises which is attributable to his potential ability to have a new lease granted to him as mentioned in sub-paragraph (2)(a) is to be ignored."

    Fs have (sucesssfully) claimed in a number of LVTs that the above paragraph confirms MV exists above 80 years and hence a relativity exists the second after midnight on the 79th year remaining. In our case a whole lot of relativity graphs were produced supporting this claim.

    Whilst i'm not convinced the LVT decisions are correct, we got our CE for £5k against the £13K the F wanted, so we were more than happy with this, especially as it was a DIY job.

    Leave a comment:


  • jeffrey
    replied
    Originally posted by Richardo View Post
    thx Jeffrey.

    Ok so extending outside of the Act doesn't limit statutory rights.

    Yes we could go to 999 years but I didn't mention the lease has an increasing GR of 1/200th of flat value every 21 years. Although we currently pay £200 until 2020, current GR would be £625 based on £125,000 value.

    So in reality extending on same terms isn't a good deal, but if we do a statutory LE cost will be c.£10k+. As we are medium-term sellers, a non-statutory extension under current terms would be significantly lower cost. As posted elsewhere, remaining term is usually the issue, not GR.

    MV at 80 years is deemed to be so small it can be ignored, but it isn't nil. We went to LVT (766) with 79.7 years remaining (qualification rules at the time delayed us) and F made great play of this point. MV was decided at 2% even though RT was 79 years and 9 months.

    Hence my sensitivity!
    ...and statutory extension eliminates ground reny with immediate effect.
    As to "80 year" point, see para. 4(2A) in Schedule 13 of 1993 Act: "where... the unexpired term...exceeds eighty years, the marriage value shall be taken to be nil". Not just small- none at all.

    Leave a comment:


  • Richardo
    replied
    thx Jeffrey.

    Ok so extending outside of the Act doesn't limit statutory rights.

    Yes we could go to 999 years but I didn't mention the lease has an increasing GR of 1/200th of flat value every 21 years. Although we currently pay £200 until 2020, current GR would be £625 based on £125,000 value.

    So in reality extending on same terms isn't a good deal, but if we do a statutory LE cost will be c.£10k+. As we are medium-term sellers, a non-statutory extension under current terms would be significantly lower cost. As posted elsewhere, remaining term is usually the issue, not GR.

    MV at 80 years is deemed to be so small it can be ignored, but it isn't nil. We went to LVT (766) with 79.7 years remaining (qualification rules at the time delayed us) and F made great play of this point. MV was decided at 2% even though RT was 79 years and 9 months.

    Hence my sensitivity!

    Leave a comment:


  • jeffrey
    replied
    Originally posted by Richardo View Post
    If I negotiate with my F to extend my 71 year lease to say 99 years and continue paying the £200 GR (so outside of the Act) can I (or new qualifying purchaser) subsequently go back and achieve a 90 year extension no GR under the Act.

    The advantage is that whilst Sportelli is currently "defining" GR deferment rates, reversion rates remain open to negotiation.

    Also if the second extension was with over 80 years term then MV negilible.

    My conveyancer thinks you can't, but the DCLG site suggests you can extend leases in perpetuity.
    Any ideas?
    1. If lease has >80 yrs unexpired, MV is nil.
    2. If extension I is non-statutory, you still have statutory rights available for extension II.
    3. If extension is non-statutory, it can be for as long a new term as parties agree (eg 999yrs). Statutory extension is 90 yrs always, so leads to replacement lease granted for unexpired term of old lease + 90.

    Leave a comment:


  • Richardo
    started a topic Can you Extend a Lease Twice?

    Can you Extend a Lease Twice?

    If I negotiate with my F to extend my 71 year lease to say 99 years and continue paying the £200 GR (so outside of the Act) can I (or new qualifying purchaser) subsequently go back and achieve a 90 year extension no GR under the Act.

    The advantage is that whilst Sportelli is currently "defining" GR deferment rates, reversion rates remain open to negotiation.

    Also if the second extension was with over 80 years term then MV negilible.

    My conveyancer thinks you can't, but the DCLG site suggests you can extend leases in perpetuity.
    Any ideas?

Latest Activity

Collapse

  • Balcony repairs - lease issue
    by Jones666
    Hi, new poster here, legal ignoramus. We live on the middle floor of a three story building (i.e. the British first floor), freehold jointly held as individual leases by all owners equally and managed by a residents' committee who employ estate managers. We and the flat above have balconies which are...
    05-07-2022, 11:13 AM
  • Reply to Balcony repairs - lease issue
    by Lawcruncher
    It is not really possible to answer your question without knowing exactly what your lease says, please quote in full:

    The "parcels" that is the part which describes what is included and (possibly) excluded.
    The tenant's repairing obligations
    The landlord's...
    05-07-2022, 22:20 PM
  • Responsibility on my freehold
    by paul woodford
    I am joint freeholder with the property upstairs and have had issues with our roof leaking. After many repairs paying my 50% to the cost, the upstairs owner has decided to extend into the loft space and onto 50% of the flat roof at the back. I thought this would reduce the cost to me to the front of...
    05-07-2022, 20:44 PM
  • Property Purchase - Environment Search came back with....
    by John2005
    Hi all. I have a question that was not linked to the same subject as my other topic so I figured it would make sense to create a new topic for this one.

    I'm in the process of purchasing a flat and I have seen on one of the searches 'Environment' one to be specific - state "Further...
    04-07-2022, 02:40 AM
  • Reply to Property Purchase - Environment Search came back with....
    by Tipper
    For ground contamination you would be better to seek out a hydrogeologist as they deal with ground water and contamination issues and its remediation. Much of their work is desk research and then followed by any necessary on site tests.

    It is likely that full site tests and necessary clean-up...
    05-07-2022, 19:05 PM
  • Reply to Balcony repairs - lease issue
    by Sydaton
    It sounds to me that the Estate Managers are wrong. From what you say, the balcony is exactly that, a balcony, it might be an extension of the downstairs ceiling but at the moment it passes through the wall it becomes your balcony. And, from what you say, you are responsible for its repair.
    ...
    05-07-2022, 12:40 PM
  • Reply to Balcony repairs - lease issue
    by royw
    Can 'ceiling' apply to something outside the property? Seems a bit of stretch to me. Suggest you post the relevant part of the lease.
    05-07-2022, 12:23 PM
  • Reply to Balcony repairs - lease issue
    by JK0
    It should be a certain proportion of the total cost, surely? I don't see how you can apportion different amounts to different flats.
    05-07-2022, 11:34 AM
  • Reply to Balcony repairs - lease issue
    by AndrewDod
    It is going to depend on the exact wording of the lease (definitions of things like "building" and so on). There is no external rule....
    05-07-2022, 11:22 AM
  • Reply to Missing joint freeholder in 2x flat block, able to to gain share of freehold?
    by JonRo15
    Thanks vmart...the other leaseholder/freeholder is desperate to sell her flat, as well and the part of the freehold. She is unable to sell/extend lease/transfer title without the missing freeholder, as there was no Declaration of Trust or similar in place. There is no company, just two individuals....
    05-07-2022, 08:56 AM
Working...
X