X

Sign Up

or

By signing up I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions


Already a PT member? Log In

Sign Up

Sign Up With Facebook, Twitter, or Google

or


By signing up, I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions


Already a PT member? Log In

Log In

or


Don't have an account? Sign Up

Forgot Password

To reset your password just enter the email address you registered with and we'll send you a link to access a new password.


Already a PT member? Log In

Don't have an account? Sign Up

  • Buy-to-Let

    Protect ourselves from Labour's "forced sell"

    In leasehold enfranchisement any lease which has a term excluding the lessee from their rights under legislation to enfranchise/extend is ignored

    So as LandyLordy states any such terms will almost certainly be ineffective

    0
    0
    I suppose only after private RRB legislation is ever introduced will we be able to come up with creative and pragmatic ideas to evade a forced sale. 

    I would have thought when filling in the property form as part of the conveyancing one could state that the bathroom and kitchen will not be included, thus rendering the property unmortgagable?
    0
    0

    I understand the thinking behind this, but your contract would be unenforceable if it contained a clause that contradicted statute. I would have thought the better approach, would be to challenge the law itself if it ever happens. It seems to me, contrary to common law to force one private individual to hand over capital to another merely by virtue of them having resided in your property.  I'd be interested to hear the opinion of a legal expert on this point.

    1
    0