In a time of universal deceit – telling the truth is a revolutionary act

Resistance by Design

This is a brilliant blog


The regeneration of London’s council estates is by now widely regarded as the answer to the housing shortage that is driving up the cost of living in the capital beyond the means of most Londoners, both renters and home buyers alike. However, in one of the contradictions that is driving London’s housing crisis, this solution has been used to justify demolishing the only homes to have escaped this escalation in house prices and destroying the communities they house, all in order to increase their housing capacity. ‘Densification’ is the typically ugly watchword on every property developer’s lips. But the argument for and against the demolition of London’s council estates should not rest on the ability of developers to increase their housing capacity but on the identity of the residents that will be housed in their replacements. Despite empty promises to the contrary, every model of regeneration reduces the rights and…

View original post 4,488 more words

Filed under: Uncategorized

The truth about freeholders’ dirty tricks

The following blog lists many of the ways freeholders and their oily solicitors and valuers use underhanded tricks to gain unethical, financial advantages over flat owners when extending leases.

I am Managing Director of a company that carries out the most lease extensions per year, on behalf of flat owners, in this country.

As such, I oversee the extension of thousands of leases each year and it is truly nauseating to see multi-millionaire freeholders regularly use unfair advantage and deficiencies in leasehold legislation as weapons to wring even more money from unsuspecting flat owners.

This is intended as a leasehold flat owner’s guide to some of the main tricks used and also give some tips on the best ways to counter them.

Trick #1dr-evil-freeholder

The freeholder’s counter offer will be huge!

Why is it unfair?

You must legally make an opening offer for the cost of your lease extension and your offer has to be ‘reasonable’. The freeholder does not have the same limitations when making their counter offer, it can be as big as they like! It is often a disproportionately large amount!

It is an unethical ploy.

Why do they do it?

Firstly, they hope it will be so shocking compared to the amount your valuer told you to expect to pay that you will withdraw from the transaction altogether.

If that ploy fails, their second hope is that it stretches your expectation of what the final amount is you will have to pay.

Thirdly, you may often find that an offer of an informal lease extension directly follows a high counter offer. (Click here for my full rebuttal of informal lease extension offers)

How can you counteract it?

I see many people, who are not necessarily clients of ours, become very upset and agitated when they receive the counter offer.

The way to counteract it is to expect the counter offer to be ridiculously high and completely ignore it when it arrives as it is 100% stuff and nonsense.

Also, do not take their informal offers!

Trick #2dr-evil-freeholder-6yhf0a

Freeholders completely ignore the flat owner during the six-month period of negotiation.

Why is it unfair?

During the six-month period of negotiation in the statutory time frame of a lease extension, the cost of the lease extension and the terms of the lease MUST be agreed.

If not, the flat owner has to pay to make a protective application to the FtT to extend this time frame or lose their legal right for a lease extension.

If the latter were to happen, the flat owner would have to wait 12 months before they could start the lease extension process again and they would be liable for all abortive legal and valuation fees for both sets of solicitors and valuers.

The flat owners must pay to make this application regardless of the fact that the delay may have been purposely caused by the freeholder!

Why do they do it?

To be nasty.

It is pure bloody-mindedness as freeholders know the flat owner will have to pay these additional fees and they will never be charged or brought to task for acting in such an unreasonable way.

It is a way of punishing flat owners for daring to want a lease extension and letting them know that the future negotiations will be brutal for them.

How can you counteract it?

Negotiate how much your solicitor will want for them to serve an FtT protective application on your behalf, BEFORE you agree to use that particular solicitor.

You will get the work involved in the application much cheaper by negotiating while the solicitor is quoting upfront to get your new business than as opposed to this arising once you are a client of the solicitor.

If possible, try to extend your lease at the same time as many of your neighbours as possible and negotiate group discounts with your proposed solicitor and valuer.

Trick #3dr-evil-freeholder-vg9ny1

Freeholders refuse to enter into negotiations on statutory lease extensions; instead they try to bully the flat owner into accepting their ‘easy’ informal offer.

Why is it unfair?

You have a legal right for a lease extension of an additional 90 years with zero ground rent. Freeholders try to distort this right by making the statutory route seem so difficult and fraught that the ‘informal’ route seems the easiest or only option.

Why do they do it?

If you extend your lease by way of your statutory right the freeholders lose their investment, your flat, and their chances of making even more money from you.

If you fall for their trick and accept the informal offer, they will make an absolute fortune from you in the future for decades to come.

How can you counteract it?

Don’t accept their informal lease extension offer, even if your freeholder is telling you to accept it. Do your own research, read my blog or watch my video.

Trick #4dr-evil-freeholder-iqik2b

The freeholders try to include new terms into your lease, which hugely favour their own interests.

Why is it unfair?

Your freeholder does not have a legal right to insert new clauses into a lease during a statutory lease extension. They try to sneak them in by ensuring the new lease is sent back to your solicitor very close to the statutory deadline.

This means your solicitor will have to inform you that if you do not accept the illegal terms inserted you will have to pay court fees.

Why do they do it?

For a variety of reasons. In the case of new licences they insert, they want to make more money from you.

They may try to insert new terms relating to the recoverable court fees through service charges. This could mean that if you sue them in the future (even if you win!), they can add their legal fees onto your service charges. Click here to read this horror story.

They will often include new terms that relate to breaches of lease terms and what actions they can take. Here they want more power over you, the ability to charge more fees and a better chance of getting forfeiture of your flat.

Are these new terms they are trying to unfairly insert in your lease important? You bet!

How can you counteract it?

As with Trick #1, negotiate the fees for these applications with your chosen solicitor before you agree to give them any work.

If possible, extend your lease at the same time as a neighbour or a group and negotiate a group discount before hand.

Instruct your solicitor that you will not accept onerous terms included in your lease.

If you go to the FtT to fight these inclusions you will win outright, as your freeholder is breaking the law by including them in the first place. They will never want to attend the FtT to argue their right to include new terms – they are just trying it on.

Trick #5dr-evil-freeholder-7u7l4x

The cost of the lease extension.

Why is it unfair?

The freeholder is entitled to receive the combination of ground rent, reversion and marriage value, as set down by law, as the ‘fair cost’ of a lease extension.

However, they will often add a fourth element of the valuation; that is, how much it would cost you to take them to the FtT to argue the much higher costs they have settled on, refusing to negotiate further.

This unfairly revolves around the fact that the flat owner will have to pay to challenge an unreasonable freeholder and the costs of doing this are considerable.

Why do they do it?

To make more money from you.

How can you counteract it?

Extending your lease at the same time as your neighbours is one of the few counter measures to this unreasonable action from a freeholder. Ensure that you have negotiated group discounts for multiple applications.

If you are not part of a group it is tougher but encourage your valuer to keep negotiating and keep the lines of communication open with your freeholder.

It can sometimes work to bluff the freeholder in thinking that you are happy to attend the FtT on a point of principle, as no one wants to actually attend the FtT – it is just a big bluff.

Trick #6dr-evil-freeholder-x27jzf

Absurd Section 60 costs!

Why is it unfair?

The flat owners have a legal obligation to pay the ‘reasonable’ legal and valuations fees incurred by the multi-millionaire during this process. These are the freeholder’s Section 60 costs.

Many of the professionals who work for the freeholder view this as a free hit and charge the flat owner far too much for their services.

Another shameless trick perpetrated by the valuer who works for your freeholder relates to his own fees. The valuer may only agree on the cost of the lease extension if you first agree his personal, much inflated fee for the work he has done. That way he ensures he will be paid handsomely for his couple of hours of work.

This one disgusts me to the core; not only are they being pig greedy, but they are selling out their own client for their personal gain. Nice! (To see how to get over this trick, read to the end)

Why do they do it?

Simply put it is pure greed. This is considered one of the benefits for representing the freeholder for professionals, i.e. the chance to charge what they want for their work.

Furthermore, the nastier valuers and solicitors become when they represent freeholders, the better a chance they have of getting more work from them, and hence the tricks I list in this article.

How can you counteract it?

Always challenge Section 60 costs! It is a written challenge that needs to be submitted to the FtT by your solicitor, so generally no one needs to attend the court.

Be aware that challenging Section 60 costs is not always a popular thing to do for some solicitors, as they could find themselves on the opposite side of the fence a week later.

Some solicitors are afraid that their arguments of this week could be used against them next week, to reduce their own fees.

Obviously, neither you nor I should be concerned about this. A solicitor’s duty of care is to get the best possible deal for their client – you! It may be prudent to clarify with your solicitor when you are looking to engage them that you will want them to challenge unreasonable Section 60 fees as part of the transaction.

How to deal with the solicitors and valuers of the freeholder.

imagesI can tell you, from personal experience, that many (but not all) of the professionals who represent the major freeholders are awful, amoral people. They will, however, argue until they are blue in the face that they do not do anything illegal but it is in fact the flat owners who are the problem by daring to want a lease extension in the first place.

Well here is a little-known fact. You have a legal right to complain about the freeholder’s solicitor and valuer if you have evidence that they have not acted honourably.

You may also be very glad to know that it is a very big deal when you complain about a solicitor or valuer to their professional bodies!

For valuers, click here and complain directly to the RICS about the actions of the valuer. The RICS has a code of ethics which state: ‘Members shall at all times act with integrity and avoid conflicts of interest and avoid any actions or situations that are inconsistent with their professional obligations’.

For solicitors, their code of ethics state that they must: 1 Uphold the rule of law. 2 Act with integrity. 3 Not allow their independence to be compromised. 4 Act in the best interest of each client.

If you feel you have not been treated fairly, you will firstly need to trigger an internal complaint for that solicitor. Solicitors have to take this very seriously indeed and will probably inform their PI insurers too. The PI people become a time-consuming nightmare for solicitors.

If you are unhappy with the result, you can complain directly to the SRA by clicking here.


Anyone with an ounce of decency will be disgusted by an industry and their ‘professional’ advisers, who gleefully use a whole raft of inequitable tricks to gain a dishonorable and immoral advantage over flat owners.

I wish I could say the above is a definitive list but, sadly, it is not! I didn’t want to write a ‘how to be a bastard freeholder’ guide here though so I focused on the most often used tricks instead.

I genuinely hope the above information will help you when you are extending your lease. To be forewarned is to be forearmed.

The above text is from a (very unpopular) speech I gave for the Leaseholder’s Valuers Forum, at the Law Society 12/11/2015.

©Barcode1966 – 2016

Filed under: Uncategorized, , , , , , , , , ,

Proposed increases to First-tier Tribunal fees: Making the flawed leasehold system even unfairer for flat owners.

Introduction Artists-impressions-of-Lady-Justice_statue_on_the_Old_Bailey_LondonThe Ministry of Justice (MOJ) has just released a consultation paper, which proposes to increase the cost of various court fees applicable.

Slipped into the middle of this paper are some very significant proposed increases to the fees payable for enfranchisement and lease extension cases heard at the First-tier Tribunal (FtT) Click here for the document (go to page 27).

These changes will have catastrophic consequences for the vast majority of ordinary flat owners in this country and will further damage their chances of being dealt with fairly by their rapacious freeholders. This blog will explain some of these consequences in more detail.

What are the proposed changes to the FtT fees?

The Government’s consultation paper says the following about its proposed FtT fees:

  1. We are proposing to introduce a simple fee structure with a £100 fee to issue proceedings and a £200 for a matter to be listed for a hearing, which will be applicable across the majority of case types in the Chamber.

Our modeling indicates, however, that these proposals, applied to all proceedings, would not meet the objective of 25% cost recovery.  We believe that in order to reach the target recovery rate for the Chamber there is a strong policy justification for charging higher fees in leasehold enfranchisement and leasehold valuation cases.

  1. Data obtained from the Leasehold Advisory Service suggests that for a sample of around 840 leasehold enfranchisement and leasehold valuation cases lodged between 1994 and 2006, the average value determined by the tribunal was around £142,000.

On this basis we believe that given the large amounts in dispute it is reasonable to expect those bringing these proceedings to pay a higher fee and have therefore modelled a proposal based on an issue fee of £400 and a hearing fee of £2,000.

This would have the effect of charging those cases at close to full cost and, based on current volumes, would bring the cost recovery percentage across the Chamber to around 25% after remissions.

However, an alternative to flat fees in these cases would be to consider a model where fees are charged as a percentage of the value at stake.

The figures used

Before I discuss how this affects flat owners I would make two points about the figures used in this document.

Firstly the data which was supplied by LEASE (What were you thinking LEASE?) is impossible to analyse or question. There are a few ‘pick and mix’ statistics used as supporting evidence but no real substance.

I have requested a copy of the full data supplied to the MOJ by LEASE by way of a freedom of information request, which you can see here.

Secondly I find it hard to believe that a mean average of the values disputed in the 840 FtT ‘sample’ cases quoted could be anywhere near as high as £142,000 per case! Unless it includes the £30 million arbitrary amounts for ‘development value’ the freeholders throw onto every enfranchisement case.

Leasehold Solutions is currently dealing with thousands of live lease extensions on behalf of ordinary flat owners and the vast majority of these cases have a value under £10,000.

At best these figures are Prime Central London centric and will completely price out a flat owner from Walthamstow who is trying to get justice against his gluttonous freeholder.

At worse, they are heavily skewered or just plain misrepresented.

Why does this proposed change prejudice flat owners even more? homepage-head

Many predatory freeholders already successfully use the current flawed leasehold system against flat owners.

Although flat owners do have defined legal rights, which make us feel all warm and fuzzy, in reality these rights do little to help flat owners against a cognizant freeholder.

This is because the onus to take legal action against an unreasonable or just plain bloody-minded freeholder is nearly always on the flat owner. They also have to pay for this legal action, by way of current FtT costs, which are dwarfed further by the cost of their own legal and valuation representation.

For example, many freeholders refuse to engage with the flat owner’s professionals during the statutory six-month negotiation period and they are very smug in the knowledge that the flat owner will have to pay to protect their legal position and there will be no fiscal penalties imposed against the freeholder for their unreasonable behaviour.

Imagine the increased power this strategy will be given if the flat owner has to now pay an additional £2,400 of FtT fees to force the bloody-minded freeholder to act!

What lets freeholders get away with acting so badly is the fact that the FtT feels it has little or limited power with cost jurisdiction and so rarely awards costs against a party who has acted unreasonably or vexatiously (even though on paper, it is allowed).

This gives freeholders the scope to act in an unscrupulous manner in the hope of gaining a further fiscal advantage or just to ‘punish’ a flat owner for daring to want a statutory lease extension.

This proposed additional £2,400 price tag for FtT fees just plays into the hands of freeholders at the expense of the flat owner.

The MOJ’s consultation paper ignorers that their proposed increase comes with the additional cost to the flat owner of their own legal representation, a valuer and possibly a barrister too!

The cost of an average flat owner in the suburbs, trying to get justice against an unscrupulous freeholder, has just become prohibitively high!

This flawed proposal will also add a fourth dimension to the existing three valuation principles of ground rent, reversion and marriage value which determine how a freeholder is compensated for a lease extension or enfranchisement.

This fourth element would be the ‘FtT cost’.

The freeholder could easily add an additional four or five thousand pounds to the fair cost of each lease extension based on the fact it would cost a flat owner much more than that to challenge them in the FtT!

This is a real gift to the many predatory billionaire freeholders we have in the UK but really bad news to the four million flat owners who will have to pay for it.

They will be the ones who will always pay for these increases either by way of paying the new fees to the FtT or by paying more than they should to their freeholder who has used this system against them.

Another gift for the freeholder could be the terms of the new lease.

During a statutory lease extension basically both sides have the legal right only to alter defective clauses and not include new clauses or licences in the lease.

Not so with the proposed changes to the FtT fees. Now a freeholder could insist on inserting a new license which states if you rent out your flat to a third party you must pay the freeholder £1,000 a year for ‘permission’ to do so.

The freeholder can’t legally do this but now the onus is on the flat owner to challenge this in the FtT to get this licence removed. Now the flat owner will have to pay £2,400 for FtT fees plus more than this for their solicitor to prepare the case case and represent them.

This after the fact that the flat owner has just paid over the odds for his lease extension, plus his own legal and valuation fees and the legal and valuation fees for his billionaire freeholder, chances are he will just accept it!

The list of how these proposed changes will prejudice flat owners all over the country goes on and on but it is plain to see that this proposed change designed to plug a gap in the MOJ’s books will also give more power and money to freeholders.

This is the death knell for the average person owning a flat in the suburbs who is trying to force his freeholder to act reasonably. Justice has just become too expensive.

If these proposed increases to the FtT fees are implemented then this img_0779will be a huge backwards step for leasehold reform.

The consultation paper closes on 15 September 2015, so please let your voice be heard, the more of us who make our voice know the better chance we have of stopping these ludicrous proposals.

Click on this link to see the paper and it asks three questions.

Please answer those questions and send them to the MOJ.

Also send a copy of your answers and thoughts to your local MP and:

The Rt Hon Michael Gove MP Secretary of State for Justice

102 Petty France



©Barcode1966 – 2015

Filed under: Uncategorized, , , , , ,

Nepal – The race to rebuild.

a-man-sits-on-rubble-after-the-nepal-earthquake-dataIt’s just over a month since Nepal’s deadliest earthquake in more than 80 years and also there have been numerous aftershocks. The death toll in Nepal has now passed 8,000, it has left hundreds of thousands devastated and homeless and now things could be about to get much worse as the monsoon season is fast approaching.

Bluesky PIE only work with ‘on the ground’ charities who are passionate about making a difference. If you would like to help Nepal but you want to make sure all the money you donate gets to the people who need the help then please help us support the Mountain Trust.

We are trying to help the Mountain Trust in two different ways.

Firstly we are looking to recruit qualified builders (more details below) who are prepared to go to Nepal and spearhead the rebuild activities in some of these mountain villages.

The second way is to raise much-needed funds for tents, water, food, blankets, clothes and medicines. There have been wide spread reports in the news of aid getting stuck in customs due to red tape issues etc.

The Mountain Trust get their supplies over the border in India and have their own transportation to send it directly to the area that need the most help.

Just a couple of days after the initial earthquake the Mountain Trust had already been to India in their battered Land Rover to get essential life saving supplies and were immediately helping 100 families in the most affected areas to survive.

Also, they can make a pound go much further by buying supplies directly in India as the staple prices are much lower than they would if you bought them in the UK and sent them over.

How can you help?

epaselect epa04729942 A picture made available 02 May shows a woman carrying her baby through what is left of Barpak village, epicenter of the devastating earthquake that hit the country on 25 April 2015, Nepal, 01 May 2015. The confirmed official death toll increased to 6,621, with more than 14,000 injured, an Interior Ministry spokesman said. The 7.8-magnitude earthquake was the deadliest in the country for more than 80 years, destroying an estimated 300,000 houses across northern Nepal.  EPA/DIEGO AZUBEL

Are you a promoter? Can you put on a gig for the Mountain Trust?

If you are a friend of ours who puts on music, dance, comedy or any other kind of gigs, would you be prepared to put on a fund raising gig with all the funds going to the Mountain Trust?

This is a way you can make a real difference to the devastated lives of those people living in the worst affected areas. If you are so super cool to do this, please let us know the details and we can share it with the music community.

We already have a comedy night being put on by the rather wonderful Sean Brightman from we Love Comedy called ‘The next biggest comedy night in Folkestone ever!’on June 21st and you can find the details here.

Bluesky PIE are also putting on a gig in July check it out here

How can you raise funds?

You can simply donate here and every pound counts and all your money will go directly to the charity to help the people on the ground.

Can you do something to be sponsored? A run, walk, fancy dress, cake sale etc? Could you host a supper party or a cupcake bake in your office? Anything that you could do to help raise funds would make a real difference.

Please let us know what you are doing and we can share it. You can build your own Just giving page

Builders wanted

Although the Mountain Trust is buying basic materials to rebuild the basic structures required to shelter families from the elements, there is a severe lack of building skills needed to kick start it.

We are looking to fly over qualified builders to Nepal to work in these areas to coordinate the efforts of a village to start the rebuild of their communities.

The builders will be flown to Nepal and met by the Mountain Trust to be taken to a village to help. Living accommodation for the builders will be basic tents and food will be provided.

Are you a builder who is prepared to volunteer one or two weeks for your time? Do you know a builder who may be prepared to volunteer? Could you share this post on your social media pages to help us spread the word?

Please get in touch directly if you would like to volunteer by emailing

Sponsor a builder

It is going to cost around £450 for a return flight for a builder to go to Nepal. Could you or your company sponsor a builder to fly to Nepal?

You can sponsor a single journey £225 or the full return for £450?.

These areas need all the help they can get to start the rebuild programme for their community and have qualified builders organising the efforts will be the vital help they need to save lives.

Why support the Mountain Trust?

These are good guys.

They are currently on the ground buying and distributing aid: tents, water, food, blankets, clothes & medicines in the Gorkha region – near the epicentre.

Their team in Nepal is right now in the middle of helping where it is most needed and they are doing an outstanding job and working tirelessly to help those who have been left with nothing.

They have funded temporary shelter, essentials and food for a over a month and have already begun to distribute basic building materials (cement, steel reinforcement, corrugated iron sheeting etc. to enable families to rebuild their lives before monsoon season.

They have been working in Nepal for decades already helping to educate some of the poorest regions. Check out their super cool project Radio Guru. 

They now need our urgent help to offer assistance to the hundreds of thousands of affected people for food and essentials and to try and rebuild as many houses as we can before the incoming monsoon season.

Bluesky PIE came across the Mountain Trust because one of our lovely friends from Folkestone went to live in Nepal and she asked for our help after the earthquake, She told us she had worked a lot with the Mountain Trust and that were really good people who did a lot of good and we agree. We have already committed to working with them a long time into the future.

Thanks for reading, we hope you can help. Every pound counts.

Filed under: Uncategorized,

The truth about informal lease extensions

bp-carrot-stickThis blog is an in depth examination the real implications of accepting a non-statutory or ‘informal’ lease extension from your freeholder.

I apologize that some of this information is complicated and difficult to follow but please bear with it because your freeholder trades on the fact that you probably won’t be able to understand it, so make sure you prove them wrong!

Informal or non-statutory lease extension are deals offered to you by your freeholder when you wish to extend your lease and they are designed, at first glance, to make it look like you are getting a deal!

Nothing could be further from the truth though. I call these informal offers ‘Trojan horse offers’. They look like a gift but when you look inside the details can be catastrophic.

The ancient city of Troy was under siege by the Greeks, and the siege had become a stalemate. The Greeks built a wooden horse and had some of its soldiers hide inside and pretended to leave. The inhabitants of Troy accepted the horse as a goodbye gift only to find that the soldiers sneaked out at night and let in the Greek army in and the city was lost.

This is a fair analogy of a freeholder’s informal offer, lets see why.

Your legal rights

If you have owned your flat for two or more years then you have a legal right to extend your lease by 90 years and reduce the ground rent to zero.

How to value a lease extension

The law says that you must compensate your freeholder three different ways when you extend your lease (or purchase your freehold)

  1. Ground Rent

This is the amount of ground rent you owe your freeholder in total for the remaining years of your lease, but calculated in today’s money;

  1. Reversion

This is the amount you would have to give your freeholder as a lump sum, so that they could invest for the remaining years of your lease (with an equivalent compound interest rate of, say, 5%), that would be worth the value of your flat – with a long lease – today;

  1. Marriage Value

This only applies if your lease has fallen below 80 years. If you extend your lease, the value of your flat will rise. The rise in value must be calculated and the total ground rent and reversion due subtracted.
Whatever is left is then split 50/50 between you and your freeholder.

In this blog I am going to use real figures from a flat I recently worked on and are going to use these figures as method of seeing the real implications of an informal lease extension.

The details of the informal are also real from a large, immoral, London based freeholder.

Our example is A1 Nice flat in London

  • The value of the flat with a long lease of 99 years £230,000.00
  • Ground rent £75.00 per year doubling every 33 years.
  • Current lease length 75 years.

The valuer recommends the following:

  • Ground rent total £2,143.00
  • Reversion total £5,849.00
  • Marriage value total £1,754.00

Total for lease extension £9,746.00

Add the total fees on top of this of £3,500.00

Total price £13,250

If you extended your lease using your statutory legal right then your lease would be 165 years with zero ground rent. The lease would not need extending for another 85 years and even then it would be very cheap as there is no longer a ground rent element to include in the calculation.

The lease length issues of your flat have been rectified once and for all and there would be no future value in your flat for your freeholder.

Your statutory lease extension from your freeholder’s point of view.

Your freeholder is more than likely a ‘professional’ freeholder (which is a euphemism for immoral, cheating, money grabbing bastards). money_quote

They bought the freehold of your building to make as much money as they possibly can from each flat.

They make money the following ways:

  • From immoral licensing fees hidden in the terms of your lease.
  • By ripping you off by claiming a ‘finders fee’ they get back from your building insurance, which you have no choice but to pay them for.
  • By syphoning off service charge fees.
  • From the ground rent you pay to them each year.
  • The money you have to pay them for a lease extension.

You extending your lease is the big pay day for them and if they can fool you into accepting an informal lease extension it will turn into tens of thousands of pounds for them. If, however, you extend your lease by an additional 90 years and reduce the ground rent to zero, this basically wipes out all the future profit they will receive from your flat.

They really do not want you to do this.

They want you to accept their ‘Trojan’ lease extension deal.

What does an informal lease extension look like?

I would like to state, emphatically, for the record that you do NOT have a legal right for an informal lease extension. Please bear this in mind, we will return to this many time in the rest of this examination.

There is another way you can extend your lease and that is by contacting your freeholder directly (or many times they will contact you) as soon as they are aware you want to extend your lease.

Below is an informal lease extension offer from the freeholder for this flat.

Dear Mr and Mrs Naive

We are happy to offer to extend your lease back up to 99 years for the inclusive price  of £10,200 and our total legal and valuation fees will be an additional £1,000 pus VAT.

The ground rent will be £250 a year doubling every 10 years.

We will are not looking to amend your lease in any way, we will only modernise the terms of your lease. We are able to complete this process in two months.

This offer is valid for thirty days from the date on this letter.

What this offer looks like at first glance

Wow, it appears that the freeholder is a nice guy after all! The total price he is offering is £10,200 plus fees of £1,200 (Total £11,400) saving you £1,850 pounds to extend your lease back up to 99 years.

Ground rent is just £5 per week and they only want to modernise the terms of your lease.

They will complete this whole thing in three months (instead of a year if you extend using your statutory rights) This is brilliant, “Where do I sign?”

That’s why I call these offer Trojan offers, because the devil is in the detail.

Let’s examine this offer more closely.

The term of the lease extension

The freeholder generally offers to extend your lease back up to 99 years and this seems like more than enough for most flat owners.

There is a very real reason freeholders only offer an extension back up to 99 years and that is because in 17 years or so, someone is going to have to extend the lease of the flat again.

greedy-man-300x199That means the freeholder gets paid a second (and third and fourth) time to extend the lease, something that would not happen if the lease had been extended by the statutory route.

As we will show later in this blog, the details of the informal offer they have offered here means that whoever is unfortunate enough to own this flat when the lease needs extending again in 17 years, is going to have to pay an absolute fortune for the privilege.

Beware of another trick the freeholder does regarding the term of the lease, they may offer you a 125 year lease extension which seems like it could be a much better deal for the flat owner.

They omit to mention that the 125 year extension starts from when the lease was originally granted NOT your 74 year lease extended up to 125 years!

If you are unhappy with this, you have no legal recourse to argue with your freeholder. You do not have a legal right for an informal lease extension it is a take it or leave it deal.

The future implications of ground rent

£250 a year doubling every 10 years does not sound like a lot of money, but it is.

A ground rent schedule like this is considered an onerous ground rent schedule, which could easily affect the future salability and value of the flat. This is because the freeholder is going to make money two different ways from this increased ground rent.

Firstly, the ground rent he will get extra before someone extends the lease on the flat again. If the ground rent is £250 per year, then the freeholder will make £2,500 extra that he would not have if the flat owner had used their statutory rights for the next ten years and then it doubles, then doubles again and again.

That’s not the big money for the freeholder though. The big money comes from the fact that someone is going to have to extend the lease on the flat again, only now, instead of the ground rent being £70 a year like it is now. The ground rent is now £1,000 a year!

So how much will the freeholder make over the next 24 years because they tricked the flat owner into the informal offer?

  • Cost of the lease extension = £10,400
  • Legal fees = £1,200
  • 10 years @ £250 ground rent = £2,500
  • 10 years @£500 ground rent = £5,000
  • 6 years @£1,000 ground rent = £6,000
  • Cost of the lease extension = £76,500
  • Plus legal fees @ £2,000 =£2,000

Total received by your freeholder over 24 years = £103,600

Compare this to the £13,250 you would have spent to extend your lease for an additional 90 years with zero ground rent forever more.

The initial saving of £1,850 your freeholder waved under your nose has turned into £90,000 profit for him, not a bad business being a freeholder is it?

Just to be very clear, when a freeholder increases the ground rent he makes money two different ways, the actual ground rent he collects each year and the future value of a lease extension with an onerous ground rent clause.

A future freehold purchase

Another ploy by predatory freeholders is to offer informal lease extensions to flat owners when they know they are going to sell the freehold of the building. They offer an informal and you pay them £10,200. A year later they offer to sell you the freehold of your building. How do you calculate your share of the freehold purchase?

You have to calculate the ground rent and reversion elements we talked about at the start of this blog but your ground rent is now huge and doubling every 10 years. You will end up paying more than £10,200 to purchase your share of the freehold!

Note: If you had extended using your statutory rights your there is zero ground rent, no marriage value as your lease is 165 years, so the only calculation is reversion but this is over 165 years. It would cost you about £250 to buy your share of the freehold!

There are also much worse offers you will need to watch out for with the ground rent. Here are some I see every day.

Onerous GR clauses


Freeholders will often ask for £250 a year rent, doubling every 10 years linked to RPI. RPI stand for the Retail Prices Index, which is used to measure inflation. Obviously no one knows what inflation will be in the future but one thing that is sure is that it will cost you dearly.

Not only will your ground rent double in ten years, someone will calculate what has happened to RPI over the last ten years and add it to your doubled ground rent!

Capital Value of flat

Freeholders will often ask for £250 a year rent, doubling every 10 years linked to 0.025% of the capital value of your flat.

After ten years not only will your ground rent double, your ground rent will then be linked to the actual value of your property!

Capital Value of the estate

Some of the estates in London have ground rent doubling every 10 years linked to 0.025% of the capital value of the estate, not just your flat!

Doubling every five years

We see more and more freeholders trying to fool people into signing informals where the ground rent doubles every five years.

This is just ridiculously onerous! Taking any of these deals could leave you owing a flat that no one wants to buy (except, of course, your freeholder who will be happy to buy it for a knock down price).

I worked out what effect this would have on a flat with a 999-year lease we worked on recently in Islington. The ground rent was £250 a year doubling every 25 years.

We worked out for the last 25 years of the lease the ground rent would be £165,000,000,000.00 per year! It is not just the future implications of the ground rent that you need to look out for if you are considering taking an informal (although that should be enough!).

Let’s look at the other areas we need to be aware of.

The terms of your lease

If you extend your lease using your statutory legal right, you are protected by law and your freeholder cannot alter the existing terms of your lease.

If you take up your freeholders offer of an informal lease extension you are not protected and your freeholder can make any changes he wishes.

‘Wait!’ you may cry ‘In the offer letter from the freeholder they state that they will not alter any terms of my lease, they will just modernise them!’

It does say that in the freeholders offer but in reality, what does the word ‘modernise’ mean?

I can tell you categorically that the word ‘modernise’ means whatever terms can be changed to benefit your freeholder. I see this every single day in my office.

It may be worth pointing out at this point that the saving your freeholder is offering you in this informal deal come from the fact that you will have no legal representation through this process.

They are telling you to not to have a lawyer protecting your interest through this process and they are then presenting this fact to you as if they are saving you money! Genius isn’t it?

The truth is though, there is no point in having a solicitor represent you in an informal as you do not have a legal right for it. It is a ‘take it or leave it’ offer so even if you find something you are unhappy about, there is no legal mechanism for you to remove it.

So what are the terms of the lease the freeholder is keen to change?

Put simply, anything that makes them more money and protects their position as your freeholder.


They will insert additional licenses that mean you have to pay them to alter your flat, sell it, rent it out, renew the rental contract each year with your tenant, get cable TV, turn over to your left side in bed at night etc.

I spoke at a block of flats a couple of years ago at some flats close to West Ham tube station. One chap in the audience thought I was exaggerating the issues of informal lease extensions and he went direct to his freeholder for a flat he rented out.

He phoned me a few months later to say that his freeholder had instead added a clause in his lease, which said that he would have to pay the freeholder 10% of the rental income he receives each month, forever more. The chap wanted to know what he could do about this clause as he had signed it a couple of months before and were now chasing him for the money!

Some of the clauses of the lease the change could also have serious implications for the security of your flat and increase the freeholder trying to get forfeiture of your flat (which they love).

They may insert a clause in your lease, which says that if you ever take them to court, for whatever reason (even if your freeholder was caught committing service charge fraud) that the freeholder’s full legal fees can be reclaimed from you by way of the service charge.

If you sign the new lease, with these terms it is now your reality and you can’t alter it.

Be very, very careful regarding the terms of a lease and remember that even if you find bad ones your freeholder has tried to insert, there is absolutely nothing you can do to remove them.


The other area to keep an eye on is timescales. You do not have a legal right for an informal lease extension and your freeholder can withdraw this offer whenever he wants, with no legal recourse at all.

Why would they do this?

There are many reasons a freeholder would withdraw an offer, but it’s always so they get more money from you. For example, if you were selling your flat and you have a buyer lined up and it all hinged on this lease extension, your freeholder may withdraw their offer claiming there was a mistake on the valuation and they now want £1,800 more.

Chances are you will just pay it!

Freeholders often do this when your flat lease length is about to go below the pivotal 80-year mark. The freeholder offers what appear to be good informal offers.

feudalism-e1397973878227They drag out the negotiations to the point when you do not have enough time to extend your lease through the legal process and then they withdraw their offer.

Your flat has now gone below 80 years and your freeholder’s investment has risen by thousands of pounds per flat. There is nothing you can do about it either.

I have lost count of the amount of times I have heard freeholder’s solicitors bragging about doing this to flat owners.

If you extend your lease using your statutory rights there are strict timescales that your freeholder must abide by.

Caveat emptor

I am shocked by how many professionals recommend that their clients accept informal lease extension without pointing out any of the above.

The big excuse used by all the professionals who recommend that their clients accept informal offers is ‘Why are you worried about the details, let the person who buys your flat worry. You save £1,800 that all you should care about. Caveat emptor!’

If a solicitor or valuer quotes you to extend their lease they have a year long battle with a knowing freeholder before they get their money. Obviously, if an informal lease extension offer is accepted they get their money very quickly with little work which is why few professionals point out all the problems I have in this blog.

Also, maybe five years ago this argument of ‘let someone else worry about the details’  may have been true, but it’s not a fair argument anymore.

More and more flat owners and solicitors are looking at the details of informal lease extensions and onerous terms inserted in the lease.

We see so many flat sales fall through now because someone has understood the implications of the informal lease extension offered.

Banks and building societies are also understanding the implications of onerous informal deals and the future effects these have on the value of flats.

In the big mortgage shake up of April 2014, the Council of Mortgage lenders brought in more stringent tests for people wishing to get a mortgage. This also included looking at the details of a flat sale.

In fact, the Halifax building society has already stated that they will take not grant a mortgage on any flat where the ground rent doubles every ten years. What about future legislation changes which could highlight these informals even more thus raising customer awareness to it?

Maybe the people buying your flat won’t understand the future implications of what you have signed up to in your informal deal with the freeholder, but is it really worth taking the chance to save a few hundred pounds in the short term?

How would it affect your future plans if you were stuck with a flat that you couldn’t sell?

Conclusion Why shouldn’t you accept an informal lease extension from your freeholder?

  • It will commit the flat to an additional £100,000 needless spend over the next couple of decades.
  • It means that this flat will have to spend a disproportionate amount to extend the lease in the future.
  • It would also cost a fortune for this flat to take part in a future freehold acquisition.
  • You will undoubtedly sign up your flat to lots of unsavory new lease terms.
  • You could massively damage the future resale value of your flat.
  • You could end up with a flat no one will buy.

The ‘Trojan horse offer’ of an informal lease extension really does contain lots of nasty details inside.

Details that can have very long term repercussions for this flat and whoever is unfortunate enough to own it. Most freeholders are professional freeholders and by and large they are not your friend. They own the freehold of your flat for one reason only and that it to make as much money as they possibly can.

You have no reason to ever trust them and I implore you to never trust them.

“Beware of freeholders, even those bearing gifts”

©Barcode1966 – 2015

Filed under: #occupy, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

World citizen – I won’t be disappointed

What happened here?
The butterfly has lost its wings
The air’s too thick to breathe
And there’s something in the drinking water.

The sun comes up
The sun comes up and you’re alone
Your sense of purpose come undone
The traffic tails back to the maze on 101

And the news from the sky
Is looking better for today
In every single way
But not for you

Filed under: Uncategorized,

The launch of Folkestone’s Big Sleep Out 2014

BSO logoWe are please to announce the launch of our second Big Sleep Out in aid of Folkestone’s Winter Shelter will take place on Saturday 13 September 2014. Click here to read my account of what it was like last year. We have moved it forward this year to miss rain this year….we hope : ) We are asking local people to ditch your duvet and be sponsored to experience a night sleeping out to raise vital funds to help Folkestone’s vulnerable this winter. You need to make you own home for the night from cardboard boxes (there are prizes for the best designed temporary homes) and spend the night outside with your family and friends. Obviously by taking part in this event you will be helping to raise much needed funds for the Winter Shelter who are pretty much the fourth emergency service in Folkestone. You will get much more out of this experience though than just raising money. Firstly, there was areal sense of achievement from the participants last year.Untitled It is a true, life-changing experience, which gives you a proud feeling of accomplishment as well experiencing a true shift in your perspective on life. It really does help you to put your life in context and help you appreciate what you have got and maybe not to take things for granted too much. The most striking change came from the young people and teenagers who took part last year. This experience really did change them and stopped them from taking things that are provided for them for granted. For those of us with kids it is worth taking part in this for that reason alone. So, build your home for the night from cardboard boxes and come along. We will be providing a hot supper, live acoustic music and poetry and games for the kids. Last years event was fabulous and we raised £8,000 for the winter shelter, the target for this event is to raise £15000! The Big Sleep Out is open to all ages, though those under 17 must be accompanied by a parent or guardian. The winter shelter will be providing nearly 1100 bed spaces, as well as hot meals, drinks and other much needed assistance from December to February. Click here to get the registration forms and for the full details. Click here to see our Facebook event  Read some quotes from the people who took part last year as well as the fabulous poem that was composed on the night. Jack Mousley “A new experience, good fun and it changed my opinion of what life is like for other people” Sarah Mousley Sleepout-2013-10-26_36“The experience really opened my eyes to living outdoors and made me appreciate all the comforts we take for granted. I am in awe of anyone who survives life on the street. I found even one night a struggle and that was in the knowledge that I had a comfortable bed to go home to!” Ollie Warren, 16, a pupil of Harvey Grammar School: “I see people in the street sleeping rough and never truly appreciated how hard they have it. Sleeping out for just one night has helped me experience what they have to go through and by raising some money, means we can try and make a difference.” Lynne Beaumont “Whereas we were going home to have a bath and turn on a washing machine, homeless people do not have such luxuries. Where to get warm? Where to dry your clothes? Where to dry your sleeping bag? Who will let you in to a cafe looking like this? Despite the hardship of that night, and for us, it was only a night, and not the reality of life on the streets, I have registered for this years big sleep out on the 13th september 2014. Homeless people are some of the most vulnerable in our town, the town we call home, and we all need to do our bit to make life safer and less frightening for those concerned”. Jim (26) (volunteered at the Winter Shelter last year) “I believe it right to care for and help those who society has literally left outside, with no means to help themselves. It is heartbreaking that some guests of the shelter literally scared to be inside, having become totally acclimatized to life on the streets.” Sarah Academy FMSleepout-2013-10-26_13 “It’s easy to forget that people in 2014 are without a home, but it’s not important to know why. What is important to know, which hit home on that stormy night, is that the work of organizations like the Winter Shelter in Folkestone are vital, because they do make a difference. Even when all I can offer is a friendly smile. I will be there this year to support them. See you there?” HOMELESS H is for homeless people who are just as important as we are O is for opportunities to raise money for those who can’t even pay for a chocolate bar M is for the meals homeless people can’t afford E is for the empty feeling of living in cardboard L is for the loneliness homeless people feel E is for empty stomachs that are in need of a meal S is for dealing with day after day strife S is for the constant struggle to improve one’s life The Big Sleep Out is for a brilliant cause Let’s hope we can put up with each other’s snores Composed at the Big Sleep Out – Nov 2013 by Daniel Lloyd (15), Jack Lloyd (11), Lauren Bailey (11), Freya Bailey (8) A big thank you to the wonderful Sharon for her poetry.

Filed under: Uncategorized, ,

Farage v Clegg – the importance of non-verbal communication

The polls show that Farage comprehensively won this week’s debate with Clegg; the ICM exit poll for the Guardian shows Farage winning by 69%. How is it possible to quantify who won on the night though? What follows is an analysis of communication skills, NVC and body language used by both and the reason Farage won.

There is an old adage used by the sales industry ‘people buy people’, in other words, regardless of what you are peddling you will only be successful if the punter ‘buys’ you.

The debate on the federalization of Europe by Farage v Clegg this week became only the sub text to the real issue debated, who did we like the best?

The clothes they wore

Nigel-Farage-and-Nick-Clegg-live-debate-3342045Farage wore a pin stripe suit, which was not overly flattering and a blue striped tie which didn’t look particularly flash, in fact he looked like middle management at an office supply company. Clegg was dressed in a much nicer dark blue suit with an expensive looking gold tie. Clegg was the best dressed by a long way and looked like a successful banker (spell check please).

Unfortunately for Clegg, Farage took the stance of a straight talking ‘man of the people’ and he painted Clegg as a ‘career politician’ who was in it politics to look after the financial interests of his rich mates. The way they were both dressed backed up the stance of Farage and the flash gold tie around Clegg’s neck may as well have been a noose.

Opening statements

Both speakers had 60 seconds to make an opening statement. The thrust of Farage’s statement was ‘people don’t want to be in the EU and we never voted for it’. Clegg’s argument stated that ‘many global issues like climate change, terrorism or catching international criminals, cannot be dealt with by countries in isolation. We need global cooperation’.

This was the only point in the night when Clegg was ahead. In retrospect, he should have collapsed to the floor feigning a heart attack after his opening statement (Ambulance for Clegg!), as he would have still had some credibility in the exit polls at this point.

Body language

Clegg needs some real help here; his body language is just dreadful! farage-clegg_2692190bHis stock hand gesture is Clegg, clenching his right fist with his thumb pressed over the top of his finger, which he then thumps up and down constantly (not unlike Clinton’s in his infamous ‘I did not have shexual relations with that woman’ lie).

Made with this frequency, it becomes purely pedantic. It is a bludgeoning ‘agree with me!’ gesture, which does not convey any personal conviction from him at all.

His other two default gestures were a flat open hand (like a karate chop), which he used, again, in a chopping motion not unlike his clenched fist. He also used the two hand, open palmed ‘stop’ gesture frequently.

None of these gestures are enduring or particularly persuasive, especially when used in conjunction with an ‘air of imploring urgency’ as favored by Clegg.

Clegg’s ‘body language package’ has clearly had professional help over the years but that has turned him into a body language robot, devoid of any real human emotion.  Every single gesture seemed controlled and had been worked on for effect, which made it look like even he didn’t really believe in what he was saying.

Farage’s body language isn’t naturally good either; it is quick, jerky and staccato. It should make him seem very untrustworthy (and he is to me) but he does come across as a human being and he uses it to very good effect.

His gestures were more expansive and varied, he used large sweeping gestures when it was needed and then changed to more controlled ones to match his content. He directed all his gestures openly and toward his target recipient, whether it was of the audience in the studio or Clegg.

This portrayed a confidence and honesty, which was sadly lacking from Clegg. Farage addressed Clegg directly 17 times; Clegg only addressed Farage directly three times, which screamed lack of confidence (taking regular sips of water didn’t help you look confident either Nick!)

Farage’s best gift though is to alter his body language to emphasize his point. He consistently punctuated his points by allowing his body language to become more excitable as his voice rose. His body language was sometimes allowed to run riot and became almost frantic as his voice rose to make a point he believed in.

This, right here, is the very holy grail of persuasion.

If you want to convince your audience to buy you and your message, you must be (or appear to be) congruent. This is what Farage did to excellent effect and it is for this very reason the opinion polls unanimously declared Farage to be the winner of something as subjective as a debate.

Non-verbal communication

So much of the message we try to convey is done through body language and non-verbal communication. It is here that Clegg lost the battle.

Clegg’s focus seemed to be constantly fixed on someone in the middle distance and he avoided direct eye contact with Farage or the audience (except for the ridiculous times he made a big deal of getting the audience members name and talking to them directly. Why Nick? This debate is much bigger than Donna from Doncaster).

I counted three different occasions where Clegg’s micro expressions seemed to contradict what he was saying. On the occasions he was saying that ‘this current situation is working well for us blah blah’ he head was slightly shaking from side to side indicating he did not actually believe what he was saying.

The pitch, pace and power used by Farage as he delivered his words was also employed to a much greater effect. He spoke slower and paused much more than Clegg, which indicates he was in control and was more confident than Clegg too.

There were a couple of occasions that Clegg lost composure on the night, which became two big nails in his coffin. One was when Farage held up the flyer of Clegg calling for a referendum on Europe (ergo, you have no personal convictions Clegg) and the “no one believes your lies anymore Nick’ taunt (ergo, you’re a fucking liar Nick).

Clegg did not fight back and instead looked uncomfortable and panicky as he somehow managed to shuffle on the spot.

Body language tells and non-verbal communications shows can never be looked at in isolation. For example, if you touch your nose once, you are not necessarily telling lies, you might just have an itchy nose.

Looking at the total non-verbal communication of both men on the night, Farage looked the most honest, confortable and congruent by a long way.


4e668__73987459_clegg_farage_poll_624Whoever advised Clegg on his strategy for the night needs to be sacked or possibly shot.

The tactics deployed by Clegg were to personally attack Farage as often as he could. Clegg and his team severely underestimated how distrusted the political leaders are in this country.

On the night Clegg made 23 personal attacks against Farage compared to Farage making just five against Clegg (some were just out and out bizarre too, at one point he asked Farage if he ‘denied the moon landings, thought Obama wasn‘t American and thought Elvis was still alive? What the actual fuck? This was pure car crash politics)

Clegg used ridiculous hyperbole again and again in these personal attacks, which Farage simply dismissed with disdainful guffaws.

It was childish, immature but much more damaging than that, it made Clegg look like a career politician, the very thing Farage was accusing him of being!

Clegg’s performance was pantomime politics at it’s very worse, it displayed all the things ‘the man in the street’ hates about politicians, saying nothing whilst talking, avoiding answering questions, immature personal insults, duplicity and slippery semantics.

Clegg’s insistence on personally attacking Farage made it seem like he didn’t have enough pro EU arguments to fill the debate (“yeh Farage? We may be losing autonomy to a federal Europe but you smell of poo!”) Yet his opening statement contained compelling arguments, which he should have expanded on, his advised strategy was 100% wrong.

Meanwhile, Farage answered all of the questions. He didn’t try to dodge them or answer questions that hadn’t been asked. He tried to be different from our Machiavellian politicians and it seemed to have worked for him.

The quoting and denial of the statistics used on the night was frustrating to those that watched. Whenever one quoted a statistic, it was immediately denied and scoffed by the other. Clegg though seemed to be the most detached from reality and logic.

For example, Clegg said half of the 1.5m Euro immigrants have gone back home, he then said he “Wanted to reinstate exit checks for counting people out of the UK when they leave’.

So how could he say half had gone home, if there was nobody counting them? (By his own admission), it is this kind of slip that can destroy all credibility. It is a totally subjective thing to judge who won or lost a debate but every single poll shows that Farage won this one.

Personally, I oppose everything Farage stands for. I would prefer to nail my own bollocks to a tree than vote Tory but I would vote Tory, before I voted UKIP.

However, Farage has done himself some huge good in these debates and Clegg has done himself some huge damage.

How do we judge who won or lost then? Obviously by looking at what was said by them both but that is only a small part of it. How it was said, how the body language and non-verbal shows backed up what they said or not played a huge part. We are all body language experts and we use these skills to judge those who wish to influence us.

Farage looked like he believed in what he was saying, Clegg didn’t. People buy people, people bought Farage.


Filed under: Uncategorized,

The truth about leasehold – An unjust and immoral system- Pt. 1

Did you know that when you buy a flat in England (or Wales) you never actually own any of the bricks and mortar of your flat; you just rent a space in the building? Your building, the land it sits on, the air rights above and the ground rights below are owned by a faceless freeholder (unless your flat has a share of freehold already).

When you buy a flat, you just rent a space in the freeholder’s building by way of a lease and that lease has a number of years left to run. Once the years left on your lease fall below 80 you will have to pay a considerable amount of money (and a considerable chunk of legal fees) to your freeholder to be granted an extension of your lease.

fued-systemIf you don’t extend your lease and the years on it fall to zero, you will no longer own your flat (even if you had bought it outright and didn’t have a penny mortgage on it) and your freeholder will take possession of it, kick you (or whoever inherited your flat) on the street, sell the flat and keep all the money. You will get nothing.

The freeholder decides what work needs to be done each year on your building, how much to spend and who will do the work but YOU will pay for it. If you are unhappy with the standard of work being done you can’t complain to the contractors because they don’t work for you, they work for the freeholder. There is a very good chance the freeholder is getting a backhander for this work or he owns the company doing the work.

YOU have to pay whatever the freeholder says is the cost of insuring your building. This will be a poor quality building insurance and your freeholder will probably get a 70% ‘finders fee’ from the insurance company. This is legal.

You have to pay a ‘license fee’ to your freeholder for anything you want to do to your flat of between £50 to £1,000. Like painting or replacing your windows, getting Sky TV, renting your flat out or turning over in bed.

In fact, to drive home further how the law sees your legal rights if you buy a flat under this feudal system, in the lease of your flat you are not called the flat owner, you are called ‘the tenant’ and your freeholder is called ‘the landlord’.

How does this ridiculously unjust and outdated property owning system still exist today? Where does it come from?This system is a feudal system with its roots in the 11th century and it still benefits lots of multi-millionaires and ‘royal’ families to this very day.

In fact, this feudal system can be traced right back to the Norman conquest of 1066. The new king, William II, had already popped a cap in poor Harold’s ass (or eye actually) and decided that he and his new royal family now owned all the land in England, Scotland and Wales outright and why not? You have to say that was a profitable days work for William!

William then hung around for another 36 years (finally being killed by an anonymous arrow on a hunting party, karma’s a bitch eh?) Once he had died, the royal family from then on decided that, instead of changing this clearly unjust decree, they quite liked owning all the land in the kingdom and our feudal system was born and carries on today.

This feudal land owning system became a constant battle between royalty and noble land owners for centuries to come (which became the driving force for all legislative land law reforms in this country) the subsequent changes however, made little difference to leasehold reform which deals with flat ownership.

When the industrial revolution was born there was a sudden driving need to build flats to accommodate the populous that were now flocking to cities to find work. As the Crown and the other strands of the royal family had already been gifted all the land (for free, thank you very much), they stood to make hundreds of millions for this property boom and that’s exactly what they did.

The Crown, The Church of England, The Grosvenor Estate, Cadogan Estate, the Portman Estate and the Howard de Walden Estate et al, all made more money than they could ever spend building castles, buying swans or just blowing it on syphilitic courtesans.

Then came the rush of non-royal freeholders who realized how much money there is to be legally made from the misery of the flat owners they feed off. The Regis Group, Freshwater/Daegan, Peverel, Proxima, The Wellcome Trust, The Matteys Group, Sinclair Gardens etc etc. Many of them immoral, lying cheats who’s sole aim in life is to wring as much money as they possibly can from those hard working people who have the misfortune of buying flats in buildings owned by these crooks.

Today and 5.1 million flats are still trapped in this unfair ridiculous feudal system. Owning freeholds is one of the most profitable investments you can ever make (as long as you don’t own any morals at the same time that is). They make money from flat owners lots of ways, for example:

The ground rent they collect (and strive to increase the cost of each year).
Rip off fees extending your lease (they can rip you off, royally)
Rip off inflated prices for building works.
Rip off service charges you have no choice but to pay.
Rip off building insurance they don’t have to declare.
Rip off management fees from managing agents they have a hand in.
Rip off licensing fees for just about anything.

Although parliament has changed legislation over the past 30 years or so to give flat owners more legal rights, make no mistake, this system still massively favours the freeholder. The law now says that if you are unhappy with anything your freeholder does you can make him appear before the First tier Tribunal (FtT) to answer for himself.

This seems like a decent and fair thing to be able to do. The problem comes when you realize the costs involved in doing this. Chances are, your freeholder will be a multi-millionaire and chances are, you’re not. He will have a solicitor, valuer and probably a barrister representing him on the day at the FtT hearing. If you go into court without representation, you will be eaten alive! Therefore the cost of you having your own representation when you go to FtT will be several thousands per day. Chances are your freeholder will be able to claim all his legal costs as a tax-deductible expense; chances are you won’t be able to.

Do you think that this is fair? I think not. Even if you were to win your claim against your freeholder, he could carry out the very same misdemeanor the very next day and you would have to start the whole process of taking him to FtT all over again.

The inequities of the leasehold system are much deeper and more engrained than I have outlined here but I will be expanding on this in later blogs. Suffice to say right now though, it is a system that should not exist.

Freeholders, who contributed nothing to the buying of the land, the building of the flats nor the purchase of those flats, should have no right whatsoever to end up owning the buildings and the land they sit on. No rights to it at all. It is only our stupid legal system based on a feudal system and backed by our inbred ‘royalty’ that make it exist at all.

There are only five other countries in the whole world, which have this, ridiculous, unfair leasehold system based on land owning as a right for the elite and they are all ex-colonies of the UK. The rest of the world operates some form of the fairer common hold system of flat ownership.

If you ‘own’ a flat and are unhappy with the ways things are, what can you do about it? Well, freeholders operate in the shadows and get away with ripping off flat owners at will because no one talks about it or kicks up a fuss. They rely on your apathy for their immorality.

One way to stop this is name and shame the crooks, go onto blogs and website and have your say (I guarantee there is a website about your freeholder somewhere on the web, declaring them to be the spawn of Satan) where you can join voices with their other victims. Write to newspapers and let them know. Arrange meetings with your fellow neighbours and group together for legal action against your freeholder or their equally evil managing agents, thus spreading the cost.

Secondly, take a leaf from our American cousins. Obviously, as the USA425px-Anti-Rent_Poster was our biggest colony, they too were heading for this same leasehold system that we continue to suffer under. Except they were saved by a churlish group of New Yorkers, who in the mid 1800s kicked off anti-rent riots and a subsequent powerful political movement which was against elitist feudal freeholders and their powers which were being misused.

This anti-rent movement, which was originally a localized movement against a particular family, spread to anywhere where other major freeholders owned significant holdings. By 1845 a new, bipartisan consensus emerged that this wholly unjust leasehold system was hostile to American liberties and it was abolished for all eternity.

I’m not encouraging middle England to start riots in London (although I would pay to watch it) The thing to learn from the anti-rent movement was how cleverly they used politics to achieve their aim. There is a lesson we can learn in the UK today.

If you say there are 5.1 million leasehold flats today and an average of two people live in a flat and they all decide to vote for the political party that support flat owners right’s, that’s seven million votes up for grabs!

Cameron won the last election with 10.7 million votes cast for the moron. Imagine what a big voice seven million voters have (there was about a 2 million vote spread between each party) Powerful stuff. Especially when you consider that most of the major reforms that that have been made to the leasehold system over the last 30 years, have come from a drive for votes from the political parties (including Labour’s ‘The end to a feudal system’ damp squib)

So, write to your MP, parliament, newspapers and Jeremy Kyle (I just threw that last one in to see if you were still paying attention). Make as much noise as you can, make it an issue that must be noticed.

As it stands the rich, royal and immoral of this country makes hundreds of millions of pounds from this elitist feudal system every year, money they have absolutely no right to have. Money that is stolen from hard working flat owners. Money that is immorally squeezed from a thousand year old feudal system designed to benefit the royal and noble at the expense of the poor.

If you own a flat and are trapped in this system, no one is coming to help you. No government is going to change this system thus alienating their wealthy supporters and paymasters. If you want to change it, you will have to do it for yourself because you can bet your mortgage (and your flat) on the fact that it’s not going to change any time soon.

©Barcode1966 – 2015

Filed under: Uncategorized, ,

Random facts from a fucked up world 3

tumblr_mesfowxolR1rpr19io1_500Every minute 18 people die of starvation in the world.

5 year old children in California make more eye contact with Dora the Explorer than their own mothers

There are 1500 newspapers, 1100 magazines, 9000 radio stations, 1500 TV stations, 2400 publishers, owned by only 3 corporations.

During the Great Famine, 1 million Irish people starved to death while English merchants burned food to keep prices from falling

In the 1970s, Nestle sent sales women dressed as nurses and doctors into African villages to convince mothers to forego breastfeeding.

In the 1980’s The CIA supported the Taliban in their heroin smuggling efforts.

There has not been a war on American soil since the Civil War 1861, yet the U.S. spends $1 trillion every year on military expenditures.

The U.S. provides Israel with at least $8.2 million per day in military aid and $0 in military aid to the Palestinians.

Nike’s Indonesia workers make $2.46 even though the average worker produces $3800 worth of shoes per day.

The U.S. provided Saddam with his chemical and biological weapons, in 2003, Standing-inlinethey attacked him because he had them.

When the stock market crashed in 2008, Goldman Sachs made $20.8 billion in profits coming directly out of people’s retirement funds.

The September 11th attacks, killed 8 American children, the retaliatory military campaigns have killed 2 million Iraqi and Afghani children.

Google reads your email and bombards you with ads based on your private communications.

The top 10 weapon manufacturers in the world have made a profit of $2.8 trillion from the ‘war’ on terror.

In Nigeria, Chevron has hired private military personnel to open fire on peaceful protestors who oppose oil extraction in the Niger Delta.

Monsanto has a revenue of over $10.5 billion per year, yet it is currently suing farmers in poor countries who make less than $500 per year.

It is estimated that Philip Morris cigarettes have single handedly killed more than 25 million human beings in the last two decades.

Gandhi never received a Nobel Peace Prize, Obama received a Nobel Peace Prize while his soldiers were ‘accidently’ killing Iraqi children.

Credit card debt is one of the leading causes of suicide in the Western world, killing approximately 22,000 people each year.

In August 2010, a mother in Indonesia burned herself and her two little children because of a Rp 20.000 debt, (about £2.50)

The Bin Laden family has owned stocks in the defense company Lockheed Martin; stocks which have tripled since the dawn of the war on terror.

Peace activist Rachel Corrie was killed by a Caterpiller D-9 bulldozer while attempting to block the destruction a family’s home in Gaza

Israel has broke 65 U.N resolutions with no consequences , Iraq broke two and got invaded, bombed and destroyed.

The British monarchy is historically responsible for more than 45 million global deaths, yet it continues to be celebrated by the media.

15 million children are orphaned due to HIV/AIDS while Pfizer continues to refuse allowing anyone to make cheaper generic AIDS drugs.

Militaries around the world insist on using the term ‘collateral damage’ to cover up the ugly reality of ‘dead children and babies’.

Before his political debut, George W Bush invested money for the affluent Bin Laden family and lost it all.

The IMF and World Bank are pushing water privatization by requiring that countries open up their water supply to private investment.

clip_image003_thumb1Every year 3.5 million men from developed nations go on so called Sex tours of Asia, where they sexually abuse underage girls and boys.

Thousands of buildings were destroyed by the U.S. invasion, yet one of the first buildings rebuilt in Iraq was a Pizza Hut.

There are more Egyptian artifacts in the British Museum than all of Egypt put together.

Rupert Murdoch owns 175 newspapers, in 2003, all 175 ‘independent’ editors wrote articles supporting the invasion of Iraq.

To this day, no one in the U.S. government has apologized to Iraqis for wrongly accusing them of possessing WMDs.

Filed under: Uncategorized,