header-logo header-logo

20 July 2020
Issue: 7896 / Categories: Legal News , Property
printer mail-detail

Home ownership overhaul ahead

The Law Commission has proposed radical reforms to home ownership, making it simpler for leaseholders to extend their lease, buy the freehold and take over the management

The Law Commission has proposed radical reforms to home ownership, making it simpler for leaseholders to extend their lease, buy the freehold and take over the management

The details were set out in three reports this week, ‘Leasehold home ownership’, covering freehold purchase or lease extension, right to manage’ (RTM) and reinvigorating commonhold.

Under the proposals, there would be a new right to a lease extension for 990 years in place of shorter 50-year or 90-year extensions. Landlords would not be allowed to insist leaseholders accept new obligations or pay the landlord’s extension costs. Leaseholders could buy the freehold of multiple buildings at once and could make a claim straightaway rather than waiting two years.

On RTM, leaseholders would no longer be obliged to pay the landlord’s costs, and the rules on non-residential space would be relaxed so more buildings would qualify.

Commonhold would include a requirement for a future repairs fund so major works can be budgeted in, providing reassurance for lenders, and home owners would be given a greater say on setting the commonhold costs.

Housing minister Luke Hall said the recommendations were ‘a significant milestone in our reform programme’.

Simon Davis, Law Society president, said the recommendations would ‘deliver real benefit for homeowners’ and ‘provide the flexibility for commonhold to develop as an alternative to leasehold, if incentivised further by government’.

Property lawyers broadly welcomed the Law Commission proposals.

The proposals ‘address inconsistent legislative requirements, streamline processes, reduce corresponding costs, grant greater protection to poorly advised leaseholders and help to keep unscrupulous landlords in check,’ Hema Anand, partner at BDB Pitmans, said.

Janet Armstrong-Fox, partner, Collyer Bristow, said fewer than 20 commonhold developments have been created since commonhold was introduced in 2002, and until lenders felt more comfortable with it, ‘the perceived limited availability of mortgage finance for commonhold homebuyers could be the biggest stumbling block to commonhold taking off’.

Adam Colenso, partner, Wedlake Bell, said the reforms required ‘very careful legislative drafting’ and commonhold ‘will not take root unless there is some motivation given to developers to apply it (because it is mandatory or there is a financial inducement)’.

Issue: 7896 / Categories: Legal News , Property
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll