header-logo header-logo

09 January 2020
Issue: 7869 / Categories: Legal News , Property
printer mail-detail

Leasehold purchase reforms

The Law Commission has launched its proposals for reform of leasehold, which it claims could potentially save homeowners millions of pounds

Its report, Reforming valuation in leasehold enfranchisement, published this week, follows a consultation with leaseholders, landlords and investors. It sets out three options to make it cheaper for homeowners to buy their freehold or extend their lease―a process known as enfranchisement. Each option uses a different method to calculate the value of the leasehold and therefore the premium the occupant should pay.

The elements of an enfranchisement premium are the term (value of ground rent over the remaining years of the lease), the reversion (value for the landlord of getting the property back at the end of the lease), the marriage value (extra value gained when landlord’s and leaseholder’s interests are joined) and the hope value (a slice of the marriage value).

The three options for calculating the premium are: term and reversion (marriage value is ignored); term, reversion and hope value; and term, reversion and marriage value.

The Commission also suggests a range of other reforms, including: prescribing the rates used in calculating the price, to eliminate a potential source of argument; helping leaseholders with onerous ground rents by capping the level used to calculate the price; creating an online calculator; and enabling groups of leaseholders collectively enfranchising a block of flats to avoid paying development value unless development has been undertaken.

Professor Nicholas Hopkins, Property Law Commissioner, said: ‘We were asked to provide options for reform that save leaseholders money when buying their freehold or extending their lease, while ensuring that sufficient compensation is paid to landlords. This is what we’ve done.’

Issue: 7869 / Categories: Legal News , Property
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll