logo
Ministers outline plans to ban new leasehold flats

Ministers outline plans to ban new leasehold flats

Yahoo03-03-2025

Ministers have outlined plans to abolish the leasehold system in England and Wales.
Proposals to change the law would ban the sale of new leasehold flats.
Under the leasehold system, third-party landlords known as freeholders own the building and a leaseholder buys the right to occupy a flat within it for a fixed time period.
The government said it wanted to move to a way of building homes that was more in line with the rest of the world, known as commonhold, where homeowners owned a share of and had control over buildings they lived in.
But freeholders said leasehold was the "most effective way of managing large complex apartment buildings".
A white paper published on Monday stated the sale of new leasehold flats would be banned and commonhold "reinvigorated" with a new legal framework.
A draft Leasehold and Commonhold Reform Bill - including the detail of how the new system would work - will be published later this year, the government has said.
New legislation would apply to England and Wales, where there are around five million leasehold homes.
Housing Minister Matthew Pennycook said reforms would put an end to "unfair practices and unreasonable costs at the hands of landlords".
Leaseholders can feel like they have no control over costs for repairs and maintenance of the outside of their building.
Around 1,000 people contacted the BBC after a BBC investigation about service charges in leasehold blocks last year.
Kasia Tarker bought a one-bedroom flat in Southall, West London, in 2022.
Her service charge bills have increased from roughly £65 per month in 2022 to more than £200 per month this year.
She said she felt helpless and could not afford the charges.
"I am going have to try and sell the flat or become homeless, I don't know what I am going to do."
FirstPort, who took over management of Kasia's development in 2023, said the "increases in areas such as insurance and health and safety costs" were beyond its control.
Kasia said she would like more control over her service charges but the government's commonhold proposals were for new builds, so would not help her in her current situation.
Jean Hopkin, another leaseholder who got in touch with the BBC, said the service charge for her three-bedroom flat in Sheffield had increased 356% - from £106 a month to £483 in four years - and was unsellable because of the high charges.
Jenny Baker in Southampton is also struggling to find buyers because of "unjustified" service charges that have gone up to £7,200 a year.
"The state of the apartment block is just terrible. The windows don't get cleaned and there's black mould on the outside of the building - what on earth am I paying for?
"I feel stuck – I can never come out of it. I feel like I have absolutely no control, and it makes me feel really anxious."
Rendall & Rittner, which manage Jean and Jenny's buildings, said the company did "not profit from or mark up any costs".
According to property company Hamptons, the amount of money leaseholders pay for communal maintenance and services in their building has risen by 11% in England and Wales between 2023 and 2024 to an average of £2,300.
Companies responsible for managing buildings have said a rise in costs can be attributed to legitimate expenses including energy prices and higher inflation rates but many leaseholders felt the costs were unfair.
Under the current system, it is the freeholder or landlord that appoints a managing agent. Under a commonhold system, residents would have more autonomy over what they pay and who they appoint to do maintainence, the government said.
What is the difference between leasehold and commonhold?
A leasehold property reverts to the freeholder after a fixed amount of time. A commonhold property is owned outright, like a freehold house.
Under commonhold, homeowners have a say on the annual budget for their building. Under the leasehold system, a freeholder or landlord sends a bill to residents for communal costs. The residents will be able to hire and fire a managing agent.
There is no ground rent charge in a commonhold property.
Forfeiture is not possible under commonhold, meaning a resident cannot be threatened with losing their home.
Natalie Chambers, director of the Residential Freehold Association (RFA), said the measures "should not be seen as a trade-off between leasehold and commonhold".
"Millions of leaseholders across the country are perfectly content with the tenure and we firmly believe that leasehold is the most effective way of managing large complex apartment building."
She added that a commonhold system would mean "residents would face greater financial and legal responsibilities for block maintenance and management".
The National Leasehold Campaign (NLC) said it was "delighted" about the announcement and called today's white paper is a significant step forward.
But NLC founder Katie Kendrick said it was "paramount" that those currently living in leasehold buildings were not forgotten.
She said: "While focusing on preventing future leasehold abuses is crucial, it's equally vital to address the plight of existing leaseholders currently bound by the inequitable leasehold system.
"Commonhold conversion mechanisms are essential to offer an escape route for those trapped."
Mr Pennycook said the government would "continue to implement reforms to help millions of leaseholders who are currently suffering".
Additional reporting by Jade Thompson
How service charges in flats spiralled out of control
Charged £720 to have a key cut - soaring bills drive leaseholders to breaking point
Flat owners' anger over 'mystery' service charges
'We can't sell our flat and can't afford to live in it'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Government struggles to cut foreign aid spent on asylum hotels
Government struggles to cut foreign aid spent on asylum hotels

Yahoo

time4 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Government struggles to cut foreign aid spent on asylum hotels

The government is struggling to cut the amount of foreign aid it spends on hotel bills for asylum seekers in the UK, the BBC has learnt. New figures released quietly by ministers in recent days show the Home Office plans to spend £2.2bn of overseas development assistance (ODA) this financial year - that is only marginally less than the £2.3bn it spent in 2024/25. The money is largely used to cover the accommodation costs of thousands of asylum seekers who have recently arrived in the UK. The Home Office said it was committed to ending asylum hotels and was speeding up asylum decisions to save taxpayers' money. The figures were published on the Home Office website with no accompanying notification to media. Foreign aid is supposed to be spent alleviating poverty by providing humanitarian and development assistance overseas. But under international rules, governments can spend some of their foreign aid budgets at home to support asylum seekers during the first year after their arrival. According to the most recent Home Office figures, there are about 32,000 asylum seekers in hotels in the UK. Labour promised in its manifesto to "end asylum hotels, saving the taxpayer billions of pounds". Contracts signed by the Conservative government in 2019 were expected to see £4.5bn of public cash paid to three companies to accommodate asylum seekers over a 10-year period. But a report by spending watchdog the National Audit Office (NAO) in May said that number was expected to be £15.3bn. Asylum accommodation costs set to triple, says watchdog Asylum hotel companies vow to hand back some profits On June 3, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper told the Home Affairs Committee she was "concerned about the level of money" being spent on asylum seekers' accommodation and added: "We need to end asylum hotels altogether." The Home Office said it was trying to bear down on the numbers by reducing the time asylum seekers can appeal against decisions. It is also planning to introduce tighter financial eligibility checks to ensure only those without means are housed. But Whitehall officials and international charities have said the Home Office has no incentive to reduce ODA spending because the money does not come out of its budgets. The scale of government aid spending on asylum hotels has meant huge cuts in UK support for humanitarian and development priorities across the world. Those cuts have been exacerbated by the government's reductions to the overall ODA budget. In February, Sir Keir Starmer said he would cut aid spending from 0.5% of gross national income to 0.3% by 2027 - a fall in absolute terms of about £14bn to some £9bn. Such was the scale of aid spending on asylum hotels in recent years that the previous Conservative government gave the Foreign Office an extra £2bn to shore up its humanitarian commitments overseas. But Labour has refused to match that commitment. Gideon Rabinowitz, director of policy at the Bond network of development organisations, said: "Cutting the UK aid budget while using it to prop up Home Office costs is a reckless repeat of decisions taken by the previous Conservative government. "Diverting £2.2bn of UK aid to cover asylum accommodation in the UK is unsustainable, poor value for money, and comes at the expense of vital development and humanitarian programmes tackling the root causes of poverty, conflict and displacement. "It is essential that we support refugees and asylum seekers in the UK, but the government should not be robbing Peter to pay Paul." Sarah Champion, chair of the International Development Committee, said the government was introducing "savage cuts" to its ODA spending, risking the UK's development priorities and international reputation, while "Home Office raids on the aid budget" had barely reduced. "Aid is meant to help the poorest and most vulnerable across the world: to alleviate poverty, improve life chances and reduce the risk of conflict," she said. "Allowing the Home Office to spend it in the UK makes this task even harder." "The government must get a grip on spending aid in the UK," she said. "The Spending Review needs to finally draw a line under this perverse use of taxpayer money designed to keep everyone safe and prosperous in their own homes, not funding inappropriate, expensive accommodation here." Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said: "Labour promised in their manifesto to end the use of asylum hotels for illegal immigrants. But the truth is there are now thousands more illegal migrants being housed in hotels under Labour. "Now these documents reveal that Labour are using foreign aid to pay for asylum hotel accommodation – yet another promise broken." A Home Office spokesperson said: "We inherited an asylum system under exceptional pressure, and continue to take action, restoring order, and reduce costs. This will ultimately reduce the amount of Official Development Assistance spent to support asylum seekers and refugees in the UK. "We are immediately speeding up decisions and increasing returns so that we can end the use of hotels and save the taxpayer £4bn by 2026." Is the government meeting its pledges on illegal immigration and asylum?

Will Musk's explosive row with Trump help or harm his businesses?
Will Musk's explosive row with Trump help or harm his businesses?

Yahoo

time5 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Will Musk's explosive row with Trump help or harm his businesses?

When Elon Musk recently announced that he was stepping back from politics, investors hoped that would mean he would step up his involvement in the many tech firms he runs. His explosive row with President Donald Trump - and the very public airing of his dirty White House laundry - suggests Musk's changing priorities might not quite be the salve they had been hoping for. Instead of Musk retreating somewhat from the public eye and focusing on boosting the fortunes of Tesla and his other enterprises, he now finds himself being threatened with a boycott from one of his main customers - Trump's federal government. Tesla shares were sent into freefall on Thursday - falling 14% - as he sounded off about President Donald Trump on social media. They rebounded a little on Friday following some indications tempers were cooling. Even so, for the investors and analysts who, for months, had made clear they wanted Musk off his phone and back at work, the situation is far from ideal. Some though argue the problems for Musk's businesses run much deeper than this spat - and the controversial role in the Trump administration it has brought a spectacular end to. For veteran tech journalist Kara Swisher, that is especially so for Tesla. "Tesla's finished," she told the BBC on the sidelines of the San Francisco Media Summit early this week. "It was a great car company. They could compete in the autonomous taxi space but they're way behind." Tesla has long attempted to play catch-up against rival Waymo, owned by Google-parent Alphabet, whose driverless taxis have traversed the streets of San Francisco for years - and now operate in several more cities. This month, Musk is supposed to be overseeing Tesla's launch of a batch of autonomous robo-taxis in Austin, Texas. He posted to X last week that the electric vehicle maker had been testing the Model Y with no drivers on board. "I believe 90% of the future value of Tesla is going to be autonomous and robotics," Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives told the BBC this week, adding that the Austin launch would be "a watershed moment". "The first task at hand is ensuring the autonomous vision gets off to a phenomenal start," Ives added. Who is Elon Musk? How the Trump-Musk feud erupted But with Musk's attention divided, the project's odds of success would appear to have lengthened. And there's something else to factor in too: Musk's own motivation. The talk in Silicon Valley lately centres less on whether Musk can turn things around and more on whether he even cares. "He's a really powerful person when he's focused on something," said Ross Gerber, President and CEO of Gerber Kawasaki Wealth and Investment Management. "Before, it was about proving to the world that he would make EVs - the tech that nobody else could do. It was about proving he could make rockets. He had a lot to prove." A longtime Tesla investor, Gerber has soured on the stock, and has been pairing back his holdings since Musk's foray into right-wing politics. He called Thursday an "extremely painful day." "It's the dumbest thing you could possibly do to think that you have more power than the president of the United States," Gerber said, referring to Musk's social media tirade against Trump. The BBC reached out to X, Tesla, and SpaceX seeking comment from Mr Musk but did not receive a response. A particular problem for Musk is that, before he seemingly created an enemy in Donald Trump, he already had one in the grassroots social media campaign against his car-maker. Protests, dubbed #TeslaTakedown, have played out across the country every weekend since Trump took office. In April, Tesla reported a 20% drop in car sales for the first three months of the year. Profits plunged more than 70%, and the share price went down with it. "He should not be deciding the fate of our democracy by disassembling our government piece by piece. It's not right," protestor Linda Koistinen told me at a demonstration outside a Berkeley, California Tesla dealership in February. Koistinen said she wanted to make a "visible stand" against Musk personally. "Ultimately it's not about the tech or the Tesla corporation," said Joan Donovan, a prominent disinformation researcher who co-organized the #TeslaTakedown protests on social media. "It's about the way in which the stock of Tesla has been able to be weaponized against the people and it has put Musk in such a position to have an incredible amount of power with no transparency," Donovan added. Another aspect of Musk's empire that has raised the ire of his detractors is X, the social media platform once known as Twitter. "He bought Twitter so that he had clout and would be able to - at the drop of a hat - reach hundreds of millions of people," Donovan said. There is another possibility here though. Could Musk's high-profile falling out with Trump help rehabilitate him in the eyes of people who turned against him because of his previous closeness to the president? Patrick Moorhead, chief analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, thinks it could. "We're a very forgiving country," Moorhead says in a telephone interview. "These things take time," he acknowledges, but "it's not unprecedented". Swisher likened Musk's personal brand to that of Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates more than two decades ago. She said Gates was once regarded as "the Darth Vader of Silicon Valley" because of his "arrogant and rude" personality. Today, despite his flaws, Gates has largely rehabilitated his image. "He learned. He grew up. People can change," Swisher told me, even though Musk is "clearly troubled." The problem for Musk is the future for him and his companies is not just about what he does - but what Trump decides too. And while Trump needed Musk in the past, not least to help fund his presidential race, it's not so clear he does now. Noah Smith, writer of the Noahpinion Substack, said Trump's highly lucrative foray into cryptocurrencies - as unseemly as it has been - may have freed him from depending on Musk to carry out his will. "My guess is that this was so he could get out from under Elon," Smith said. In Trump's most menacing comment of the day, he suggested cutting Musk's government contracts, which have an estimated value of $38 billion. A significant chunk of that goes to Musk's rocket company SpaceX - seemingly threatening its future. However, despite the bluster, Trump's warning may be a little more hollow than it seems. That's because SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft ferries people and cargo to the International Space Station where three NASA astronauts are currently posted. It demonstrates that SpaceX has so entrenched itself in the US space and national security apparatus, that Trump's threat could be difficult to carry out. You could make a similar argument about Musk's internet satellite company, Starlink. Finding an alternative could be easier said than done. But, if there are limits on what Trump can do, the same is also true of Musk. In the middle of his row with Trump, he threatened to decommission the Dragon - but it wasn't long before he was rowing back. Responding to an X user's suggestion he that he "cool down" he wrote, "Good advice. Ok, we won't decommission Dragon." It's clear Musk and Trump's friendship is over. It's less certain their reliance on each other is. Whatever the future for Musk's businesses is then, it seems Trump - and his administration's actions - will continue to have a big say in them. Trump and Musk trade insults as row erupts in public view Tesla shares tumble as Trump-Musk feud erupts Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the world's top tech stories and trends. Outside the UK? Sign up here. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

A British TV art expert who sold works to a suspected Hezbollah financier is sentenced to prison
A British TV art expert who sold works to a suspected Hezbollah financier is sentenced to prison

Yahoo

time11 hours ago

  • Yahoo

A British TV art expert who sold works to a suspected Hezbollah financier is sentenced to prison

LONDON (AP) — An art expert who appeared on the BBC's Bargain Hunt show was sentenced Friday to two and a half years in prison for failing to report his sale of pricey works to a suspected financier of Lebanon's militant Hezbollah group. At a previous hearing, Oghenochuko Ojiri, 53, had pleaded guilty to eight offenses under the Terrorism Act 2000. The art sales for about 140,000 pounds ($185,000) to Nazem Ahmad, a diamond and art dealer sanctioned by the U.K. and U.S. as a Hezbollah financier, took place between October 2020 and December 2021. The sanctions were designed to prevent anyone in the U.K. or U.S. from trading with Ahmad or his businesses. Ojiri, who also appeared on the BBC's Antiques Road Trip, faced a possible sentence of five years in prison in the hearing at London's Central Criminal Court, which is better known as the Old Bailey. In addition to the prison term, Justice Bobbie Cheema-Grubb said Ojiri faces an additional year on license — a period of time after a prison sentence ends when an offender must stay out of trouble or risk going back to prison. She told Ojiri he had been involved in a commercial relationship 'for prestige and profit' and that until his involvement with Ahmad, he was 'someone to be admired.' 'You knew about Ahmad's suspected involvement in financing terrorism and the way the art market can be exploited by someone like him," she said. "This is the nadir — there is one direction your life can go and I am confident that you will not be in front of the courts again.' The Met's investigation into Ojiri was carried out alongside Homeland Security in the U.S., which is conducting a wider investigation into alleged money laundering by Ahmad using shell companies. 'This prosecution, using specific Terrorism Act legislation, is the first of its kind and should act as a warning to all art dealers that we can, and will, pursue those who knowingly do business with people identified as funders of terrorist groups,' said Commander Dominic Murphy, head of the Metropolitan Police's Counter Terrorism Command. Ahmad was sanctioned in 2019 by the U.S. Treasury, which said he was a prominent Lebanon-based money launderer involved in smuggling blood diamonds, which are mined in conflict zones and sold to finance violence. Two years ago, the U.K. Treasury froze Ahmad's assets because he financed Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Shiite militant organization that has been designated an international terrorist group. Following Ojiri's arrest in April 2023, the Met obtained a warrant to seize a number of artworks, including a Picasso and Andy Warhol paintings, belonging to Ahmad and held in two warehouses in the U.K. The collection, valued at almost 1 million pounds, is due to be sold with the funds to be reinvested back into the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Home Office.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store