Jump to content

Coppen estates home insurance penalties?

Recommended Posts

Our freeholder is Coppen Estates, all we did when we chose our insurance was make sure Coppen Estates were mentioned on the household insurance as the freeholder, we then forwarded a copy of the insurance policy to Coppen.

Edited by crazybaby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If a house's leaseholder (T) does not wish to comply with the insurance covenant (and ALWAYS ensure that the covenant is there: occasionally it's not!), there are two ways out:

1. Buy the freehold reversion from its owner (L).

2. Use rights under s.164 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. This offers an opt-out if T serves an appropriate Notice on L, demonstrating that T has equivalent or better insurance obtained independently.

 

I do remember instructions from my solicitor to send a copy of my alternative insurance documents to Coppen as soon as I moved in, which I did, and I understood at the time that was the end of the matter. However they still continue to charge me, even though I have wrote to them explaining this. Is this the same as 'serving notice'?

__________________

 

---------- Post added 18-06-2013 at 17:38 ----------

 

Our freeholder is Coppen Estates, all we did when we chose our insurance was make sure Coppen Estates were mentioned on the household insurance as the freeholder, we then forwarded a copy of the insurance policy to Coppen.

 

Was that done under the instruction of your solicitor? Also, by doing that does that mean you are not charged these penalties?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just write 'not applicable' over the request and send Coppen the rent only. I bet you a pound to a penny you'll hear nothing else. St Giles sent me a letter advising that if they had to reply to any of my correspondence a £15 per letter charge would be made. I replied advising them that if I had to respond to any of their letters apart from the rent request there would be a £50 per letter charge from me. The correspondence stopped immediately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just write 'not applicable' over the request and send Coppen the rent only. I bet you a pound to a penny you'll hear nothing else. St Giles sent me a letter advising that if they had to reply to any of my correspondence a £15 per letter charge would be made. I replied advising them that if I had to respond to any of their letters apart from the rent request there would be a £50 per letter charge from me. The correspondence stopped immediately.

 

I like your style regarding the letter charges! I have been doing the 'not applicable' that for the last 3 years but they still continue to charge and I now have had a phone call from them pursuing payment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it was, so far as I know we haven't incurred any penalties as yet but we haven't been in the house a year yet. If I remember correctly we had to make sure that we had insured with a reputable insurer and the landlords interest was noted on the policy, the property has a long lease so we're not really worried. Also I think if you do have to pay out the money for not insuring with Coppen they can only charge you for so many years, and that's only applicable when you sell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I requested a copy of the lease conditions recently, as the property has been in our family for years but we've never had a copy. Also told them I need to extend my lease, but no response from them ... my lease is now around 68 years, so I need to urgently extend :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I see where you are coming from Jeffrey and I agree with your comments. At the end of the day it comes down to the mentality that 'we can't afford it and it'll be fine', when in fact it won't. The people who have not bought the freehold bury their heads in the sand, rightly or wrongly and will pay the price 20yrs down the line when their property is worth very little. The whole area then goes into decline as the properties are sold way below market value. How many ignored the shortfall issues with endowment mortgages hoping if they didn't think about it, it would go away?

My point is that the leaseholder is not going to put up £4-5k when they can't see any immediate advantage?

You're right, of course.

A few years ago, I did a trial mailshot to much of the Mosborough housing development within the titles of Coppen and its associate PAS Property Services Ltd. I explained- as clearly as I could- why I recommended action sooner rather than later. Not many replied!

 

---------- Post added 19-06-2013 at 16:08 ----------

 

I requested a copy of the lease conditions recently, as the property has been in our family for years but we've never had a copy. Also told them I need to extend my lease, but no response from them ... my lease is now around 68 years, so I need to urgently extend :/

You can buy a copy (from HMLR) of:

a. the leasehold title registered in your name; and

b. the lease/underlease itself.

 

Use the "I want to.." column at http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/public.

 

---------- Post added 19-06-2013 at 16:10 ----------

 

I do remember instructions from my solicitor to send a copy of my alternative insurance documents to Coppen as soon as I moved in, which I did, and I understood at the time that was the end of the matter. However they still continue to charge me, even though I have wrote to them explaining this. Is this the same as 'serving notice'?

__________________

 

---------- Post added 18-06-2013 at 17:38 ----------

 

 

Was that done under the instruction of your solicitor? Also, by doing that does that mean you are not charged these penalties?

No, it doesn't- because:

a. T is not using the s.164 procedure and

b. Coppen would not get its commission from the insurer in that case.

 

---------- Post added 19-06-2013 at 16:12 ----------

 

We bought our freehold and it was the best money we spent. However, my family member's property is a flat, in a block of four - are there separate rules for this? In any case, is it better that flats remain leasehold?

Flats are different from houses. For flats, the rights are:

a. (individual) to extend the lease by 90yrs; and

b. (collective) to buy the freehold reversion jointly (but each participant has to remain a leaseholder).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're right, of course.

A few years ago, I did a trial mailshot to much of the Mosborough housing development within the titles of Coppen and its associate PAS Property Services Ltd. I explained- as clearly as I could- why I recommended action sooner rather than later. Not many replied!

 

Might be worth redoing your mailshot around Waterthorpe as many of my neighbours in S20 have still not taken the offer up to buy the freehold of their properties. The original selling price when we moved into the property was £1200, now it is in the region of £5000 from St. Giles Properties and rising, it has climbed rapidly now the leasehold has less than 70 years to run. The general consensus of opinion of some of my neighbours is that 'we don't intend to move' so it won't bother us. This is probably true in first instance but if they do decide to sell for whatever reason it will make their home un mortgagable and seriously affect the selling price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A leasehold estate is what's called a 'wasting asset'. As the unexpired term shrinks, so does the leasehold's value. Correspondingly, the reversion's value rises. Think of a sand-filled eggtimer. The lurch is accentuated by 'marriage value', applicable (by statute) once that unexpired term falls below 80yrs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is not 95% of the land owned by 5% of the population (ie;lords and dukes etc),

that's why a lot of homes are leashold?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is not 95% of the land owned by 5% of the population (ie;lords and dukes etc),

that's why a lot of homes are leashold?.

No. Most houses in E&W are owned freehold by owner-occupiers of subletting owners.

Why houses are leasehold at all? See my post #15.

But the Crown has paramount title as ultimate owner of it all, i.e. superior even to a freeholder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're right, of course.

A few years ago, I did a trial mailshot to much of the Mosborough housing development within the titles of Coppen and its associate PAS Property Services Ltd. I explained- as clearly as I could- why I recommended action sooner rather than later. Not many replied!

 

Might be worth redoing your mailshot around Waterthorpe as many of my neighbours in S20 have still not taken the offer up to buy the freehold of their properties. The original selling price when we moved into the property was £1200, now it is in the region of £5000 from St. Giles Properties and rising, it has climbed rapidly now the leasehold has less than 70 years to run. The general consensus of opinion of some of my neighbours is that 'we don't intend to move' so it won't bother us. This is probably true in first instance but if they do decide to sell for whatever reason it will make their home un mortgagable and seriously affect the selling price.

 

Have any leaseholders ever been offered the right of 1st refusal to buy the freehold before it was sold on to the new owners Coppen Estates and PAS Property Services?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.