Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.


We all know where this is going to end - probably regardless of the quality of the advice received - because these 'poor' purchasers need protecting from themselves in the overly supportive culture we have these days.

But let us not forget the real bad boys (and the ones who have so far banked the benefits of this immoral practice) are the house builders. I was told by a major house builder that their houses are often disposed of on a leasehold basis for no other reason than the millions of pounds this adds to their already very healthy profits. Apparently it is/was the "cherry on the cake" so woe betide any tame buyer's solicitors who suggested that should change.

And again, what were these buyer's told at the point of sale? This is such a fundamental part of what they purchased perhaps the builder should be required to prove that the distinction between leasehold/freehold was fully explained to a buyer before they are exempt from compensating? Going forward this difference in tenure should be outlined to a buyer at the point of sale, in a prescribed form and a receipted notice for this form part of the CML requirements.

From my own personal experience as a property lawyer just listening in when a family member recently purchased a new build home from a well known and supposedly reputable builder the BS - sorry misrepresentations, the site sales office still gave out on several aspects (of this freehold purchase) was astounding. But then if commission drives what they do need I say more?

Your details