• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Lettuce Liz then Tetchy Rish! and the battle to replace him

Please please don’t buy a leasehold property unless you have no other options.

It can work, but there is a murky world behind leaseholds, service charges and ground rents.

Years ago I asked a developer and an architect independently about a certain leasehold property and their first question was exactly the same: “When was it built?”

- that was nothing to do with the length of lease or the anticipated ongoing maintenance costs, but to do with the dark way the finances are misrepresented to appeal to investors and owners alike.

I’ll leave that there for now but it’s a discussion for another time if necessary.
It's particularly the service charges I've seen are the current problem, the other two were in the past but some legislation has caught up (though a host of properties exist with short leases and ground rents still, those I wouldn't touch). Any views on part / share of freeholds, given I've mentioned I'm looking around London and whole freeholds are not cheap? The first obvious thing is who you share it with and that relationship needing to be tight (might be a better thread for this, don't wish to derail the chat though I'm intrigued to see what policies both parties come up with on housing for the GE)
 
Last edited:
What in the name of Jumping Jehosevah is this


tumblr_o16n2kBlpX1ta3qyvo1_1280.jpg
Well that's convinced me.
 
I like the "I made 5 pledges" bit.

Then only mentions the one, also coincidentally the one that has more or less nothing to do with him (and it's still shit).
 
That
I like the "I made 5 pledges" bit.

Then only mentions the one, also coincidentally the one that has more or less nothing to do with him (and it's still shit).
That pledge was that he'd half inflation in 2023 too wasn't it? Not sure if he achieved that?
 
Inflation1.png

Depends what measure you use, the answer is "sort of", but the reality is it's still too high.
 
It's particularly the service charges I've seen are the current problem, the other two were in the past but some legislation has caught up (though a host of properties exist with short leases and ground rents still, those I wouldn't touch). Any views on part / share of freeholds, given I've mentioned I'm looking around London and whole freeholds are not cheap? The first obvious thing is who you share it with and that relationship needing to be tight (might be a better thread for this, don't wish to derail the chat though I'm intrigued to see what policies both parties come up with on housing for the GE)

(Agreed this is a tangent that is best elsewhere but will post here until it finds/is moved to the right place)

I’ve involvement in a couple of leaseholds so will give a few thoughts. Given from the perspective of a non owner-occupier it’s a sensitive subject, but any insight could be of use going forward.

Firstly, I mentioned the age of leasehold developments previously. The main reason for this is (unfortunately) 1 + 2 bed urban flats have prime rental appeal, meaning they are sold predominantly to investors looking for high yields with minimal effort and owner-occupiers are buying against against that cash-heavy tide. The value of those properties is subsequently determined by the yield. The potential owner-occupier is priced out or forced to pay an inflated price predetermined by an investor.

An added danger here is new developments (off-plans are next level and to be approached with extreme caution) are always sold with minimal ground rent and maintenance charges which artificially inflate the yield attracting investors, and the low costs are appealing to owner-occupiers. Those low charges are presented (misrepresented) as indicative of new-build efficiency and low anticipated ongoing maintenance costs. Once all units are sold the maintenance contracts are rapidly traded and can be bounced many times in the early years before eventually ‘settling down’. Needless to say the charges will invariably have skyrocketed and the service deteriorated with serious consequences for those on wafer thin margins.

(Worth pointing out here this is why so many of recent buy-to-leters, sucked in by the shiny new city centre flats with dreams of a property portfolio are now absolutely f*cked. The yields were a misrepresentation eroded by costs alone and interest rate rises providing an additional punishment beating. We could get into the affects of Stamp duty and Capital Gains Tax changes on additional properties too, but it’s probably best to get back to owner-occupiers for now (no opinion of any sympathy given or expected, or the rights and wrongs of any of this btw)).

As for the leasehold experience, once the costs have stabilised a little you can only hope you have a reasonable company and savvy group of leaseholders holding them to account, with robust communication and meetings at your AGM etc. It’s imperative the issuing of contracts is scrutinised and you are getting value for money. If you are in a shared leasehold arrangement you need to be sure you are all on the same page and are accomplished when authorising works or issuing contracts.

On this note, I’ve had involvement in ex-council leaseholds which can represent extremely good value price wise, with high yields due to lower purchase prices, traditionally low ground rents and maintenance charges. HOWEVER, when it comes to repairs, communal areas etc you will have no say who the contracts are awarded to and be forced to pay your share. Bear in mind it is very galling when you know the repairs are not sensibly priced or sourced, AND, it’s is only the leaseholders that will pay, the council being leaseholder for the properties still tenanted through them.

One last thing, the leasehold aspect at purchase might seem a necessary but manageable evil. But it will rapidly grow disproportionately going forward and is really something to think about. Your mortgage will by and large stay the same (interest fluctuations accepted), and in fact in real terms, assuming pay-rises, inflation erosion etc, your overall % of dedicated salary to it will come down. The leasehold maintenance charges are exposed to increases forever, just as your rent once was and so the ratio of mortgage to leasehold charge will only go one way. The awareness and irritation of that quickly grows far beyond the small seemingly manageable seed it starts with.

You’ll always have the psychological aspect of being referred to as the ‘Leaseholder’ and not as an ‘Owner’ too, and some of the conditions and restrictions imposed will serve as a reminder from time to time. Granted the freedom feels huge relative to renting, but as we’re throwing everything out there it’s another one of those things worth considering.

Anyway, hope that might be of some sort of use. I understand due to location you might have no choice but to go LH, but at least there’s a bit of food for thought there . Last thing, don’t forgot despite reservations it can work. A lot of people do so without too much bother so I guess it’s just about picking a route though and having your eyes wide open.

I don’t envy you the challenge but it will be worth it. Good luck!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jlo
Weren’t energy costs causing half the inflation when he made the pledge? So had those costs simply flatlined at the higher level (or better still gone down) the pledge would have been met even if every other element continued to rise. The pledge just sounded like a lazy calculated political gamble that there’d be some market corrections that would reduce the rate allowing him to claim he’d met the pledge whilst actually doing fuck all to make it happen.
 
It's like how Michael Beale would have been almost certain to be better than Bruno Lage and Steve Davis just by default. Wouldn't have been very good though.

Also base rate hikes slow down inflation (but cause other unwanted side effects) and he has zero influence on that, as much as I'm sure he'd like to.
 
Anyway, hope that might be of some sort of use. I understand due to location you might have no choice but to go LH, but at least there’s a bit of food for thought there . Last thing, don’t forgot despite reservations it can work. A lot of people do so without too much bother so I guess it’s just about picking a route though and having your eyes wide open.

I don’t envy you the challenge but it will be worth it. Good luck!
Thanks Epsom. Very helpful, I might pick this up with you in a couple of weeks. I'm by far favouring avoiding LH but it then leave a choice of being on the commuter belt to London and worst of both worlds, or something radically different / further which I'm not sure either of us are currently up for (though are checking some cities out - Birmingham is obvious but it's not what she wants)
 
Thanks Epsom. Very helpful, I might pick this up with you in a couple of weeks. I'm by far favouring avoiding LH but it then leave a choice of being on the commuter belt to London and worst of both worlds, or something radically different / further which I'm not sure either of us are currently up for (though are checking some cities out - Birmingham is obvious but it's not what she wants)

No problem.

Funnily enough Birmingham is a place I’m familiar with and seems to be at the epicentre of a relatively new phenomenon. As investors margins are squeezed to a point it’s no longer worth while (a good thing I hear you say (and yes, I agree too)), developers are building blocks that have contract Blue-chip lettings pre-arranged (There is one right now in Harbourne with lettings underpinned by Deutsche Bank), meaning for example for an agreed investment of X, there is a guaranteed NET monthly return of Y. In the Harbourne case that is fixed for 5 years, so the investor is not susceptible to any changes in costs or void months etc. After that period obligation is met and the property can be let or sold on the open market.

I appreciate it’s a very sensitive subject and I really feel for you. It must be very frustrating when all you want to do is get on the housing ladder and have a home and other forces are steering the bloody ship. That said, there is always a route through eventually. I’ll leave that there for now and yes, more than happy to pick up it up later. All this just one person’s view by the way, but every little helps and all that.
 
Any danger of the transphobic cunt apologising?

Thought not.

Penny Mourdant has, too her credit, gone a way towards criticising him in the commons just now, and suggested he'll make further comment which I'm sure he'll frame as an apology. Obviously we all know it will be bullshit, of course

The prime minister is a good and caring man. I am sure that he has reflected on things and I understand he will say something later today, or perhaps even during this session.

And that is not just about Mr and Mrs Ghey that he should reflect on, but I am sure he is also reflecting about people who are trans, or who have trans loved ones and family, some of whom sit on these green benches.

Tbh in my gut I don't actually think he is transphobic; he's saying transphobic things to score political points and taking bad advice leading up to it, because he's just plain bad at politics, as well as being easily manipulated - but I don't think he is actually a nasty individual in that way. Nothing to back it up obviously, and quite probably naive of me. And of course, it's a despicable thing to say, whether you believe it in your heart or not. There's even an argument to say it's even worse behaviour if you say it and don't believe it. I'm probably not articulating my thoughts very well on this one but hopefully you get he drift, I deplore the line and culture war bullshit that it all fuels
 
Penny Mourdant has, too her credit, gone a way towards criticising him in the commons just now, and suggested he'll make further comment which I'm sure he'll frame as an apology. Obviously we all know it will be bullshit, of course



Tbh in my gut I don't actually think he is transphobic; he's saying transphobic things to score political points and taking bad advice leading up to it, because he's just plain bad at politics, as well as being easily manipulated - but I don't think he is actually a nasty individual in that way. Nothing to back it up obviously, and quite probably naive of me. And of course, it's a despicable thing to say, whether you believe it in your heart or not. There's even an argument to say it's even worse behaviour if you say it and don't believe it. I'm probably not articulating my thoughts very well on this one but hopefully you get he drift, I deplore the line and culture war bullshit that it all fuels
He's already made his response, it was to slag Starmer off for weaponising a tragedy

 
...less than 50 days to destroy it
 
There is almost a charm in how she generally believes she is relevant.

The only conservative in the room sounds remarkably like nobody else agrees with her ideas. Which suggests they might be batshit mental
 
Back
Top