Julia139   10 #1 Posted June 28, 2014 Hello  I am in the process of buying a house in Sheffield and have just found out from my solicitor that its both freehold and leasehold.  I have never heard of this before and wondered if this was common in Sheffield?  Thanks in advance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
mc55 Â Â 10 #2 Posted June 28, 2014 ours is too - seemingly it was leasehold originally and then at some point in its history the owners purchased the freehold - so when we purchased the property we were presented with both sets of documentation, but the freehold overwrites the leasehold. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
babyalex1 Â Â 10 #3 Posted June 28, 2014 That's great, the owner has purchased the freehold for you, ie. no ground rent, just make sure that no further covenants were imposed by the previous owner of the freehold, they most often don't and your solicitor should advise you of this in any event. Â Oh, and yes, it's relatively common in Sheffield, from what I've heard we're one of the most 'leasehold house' populated cities so when people decide to purchase the freehold this is the outcome. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
999tigger   10 #4 Posted June 28, 2014 (edited) Very nice. Edited June 28, 2014 by 999tigger Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
ccit   10 #5 Posted June 29, 2014 Our property was leasehold and we bought the freehold many years ago. We had to contact the Land Registry a while ago and found that they had two titles because of this so when I explained, they altered it and now we have the correct one registered. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Julia139 Â Â 10 #6 Posted June 29, 2014 Hello everyone and thanks for your replies. Â Its nice to know its quite common and you have not any problems from this. Â I will get my solicitor to check for any covenants in the lease as advised. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
babyalex1 Â Â 10 #7 Posted June 29, 2014 Our property was leasehold and we bought the freehold many years ago. We had to contact the Land Registry a while ago and found that they had two titles because of this so when I explained, they altered it and now we have the correct one registered. Â umm... I may be wrong... but I was always under the impression that merging the Leasehold and Freehold wasn't a very good idea, better to have them as separate entities, perhaps Jeffrey Shaw could clarify? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
H.P Â Â 10 #8 Posted June 29, 2014 We are just in the process of buying our leasholders intrest in the leashold, as I understand it the property becomes freehold when the process is over. Once the title deeds are amended it should simply show as freehold on the land registry website. My neighbour did the same last year and hers now shows as freehold, I was also under the impression that once purchaced any covenant imposed become irrelevant. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
babyalex1   10 #9 Posted June 29, 2014 We are just in the process of buying our leasholders intrest in the leashold, as I understand it the property becomes freehold when the process is over. Once the title deeds are amended it should simply show as freehold on the land registry website. My neighbour did the same last year and hers now shows as freehold, I was also under the impression that once purchaced any covenant imposed become irrelevant.  Do you mean you are purchasing the freehold reversion? The freehold and leasehold interests can still exist as separate entities once purchased, they do not automatically merge, an application must be made to HMLR. The difficulty with this is that until very recently (2007 I believe) merging the freehold and leasehold interests extinguished the rights granted by the Lease over neighbouring properties, i.e right of access. I believe the law was then changed to acknowledge these rights, but they are not specifically listed in the new freehold register once the lease has been determined unless specifically requested. This could potentially cause problems, if the right isn't registered and the original documents become misplaced, especially with dematerialisation.  To my way of thinking it would be better to continue to let both interests exist. I also believe a further registration fee of approx. £40 would be payable, to merge the titles.  With regards to the covenants, the transferor of the freehold title may impose covenants when disposing of the freehold interest, these would be contained in the TR1, nothing to do with the lease. Just as many originally freehold properties may contain covenants, i.e building restrictions etc etc Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Jeffrey Shaw   83 #10 Posted June 29, 2014 Yes. As long as V owns both estates, P buys the property as if it were a simple freehold. Non-merger can be for various reasons. Here are some: 1. The leasehold was not yet registered at HMLR when its owner enfranchised. 2. The leasehold was in mortgage when its owner enfranchised and did not involve the mortgagee. 3. The leasehold and freehold reversion are not in exactly the same names or held in exactly the same way. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
H.P Â Â 10 #11 Posted June 30, 2014 Not sure on the reversion bit, but property law isn't my thing. During the last couple of years several of my neighbours have done the same. Leaseholder wanted ridiculous amounts of money for consent letters, it actually worked out cheaper to employ a solicitor and buy the leasehold from him. I'm also guessing we are merging the titles given a fee to land registry for this is itemised on my bill. Either way it's making my life much simpler and my building work can now commence Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
babyalex1   10 #12 Posted June 30, 2014 Not sure on the reversion bit, but property law isn't my thing. During the last couple of years several of my neighbours have done the same. Leaseholder wanted ridiculous amounts of money for consent letters, it actually worked out cheaper to employ a solicitor and buy the leasehold from him. I'm also guessing we are merging the titles given a fee to land registry for this is itemised on my bill. Either way it's making my life much simpler and my building work can now commence  There would always be a Land Registry fee to transfer ownership of the freehold to you, I would expect there to be a further fee to deal with the merger of the leasehold and freehold titles. I don't think as long as it's done properly merging the 2 titles is an issue really, it just isn't really necessary. Good luck with your building works! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...