Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi there


I own the leasehold to a flat, which is in a converted house (along with 3 other flats). The flats are all probably in the range of ?300k-?450k.


The freeholder arranges the buildings insurance, which we split 4 ways. We arrange our own contents insurance.


Does anyone have an idea of a rough cost? The cost seems very high to me.


Thanks!

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/279261-leasehold-buildings-insurance/
Share on other sites

Normally buildings insurance (non leasehold) is based on the rebuild cost (not the market value) of the property - although you may find that leaseholder buildings insurance doesn't cover quite what owner insurance does. Clearly the cost of rebuilding flats is more than the cost of rebuilding an equivalent single house (more bathrooms and kitchens normally).
I'm in the exact same situation & each flat has to pay about ?450 a year just for buildings insurance - a complete rip off. My vague understanding is that freeholder companies get kickbacks from insurance companies/brokers. There is no incentive for them to find the cheapest deal for the leaseholders. I'd be interested to hear what you're being asked to pay.

I'm wondering if 'Southwark leaseholders' need a thread of their own...?


Or does it exist already?


I understand that CAB Southwark have been paid to to take this task on but where is the coherence?


Southwark Leaseholders are being fleeced to pay for major works /cladding (under 18m rule is a slap in the face ) /district heating then asked to cope with infill new build regardless of loss of amenity - there are a lot of issues to consider. Southwark v Southwark.


Thoughts please?

On the subject of buildings insurance for a property with a freeholder and leaseholder - our property has 2 flats and each has a share of the freehold .


We pay a very high buildings insurance premium - ?1200 pa split between the two . The building has been underpinned and this has proved a major hindrance in arranging alternative insurance .

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Tommy has been servicing our boiler for a number of years now and has also carried out repairs for us.  His service is brilliant; he’s reliable, really knowledgeable and a lovely guy.  Very highly recommended!
    • I have been using Andy for many years for decorating and general handyman duties. He always does a great job, is very friendly and his prices are competitive. Highly recommend.
    • Money has to be raised in order to slow the almost terminal decline of public services bought on through years of neglect under the last government. There is no way to raise taxes that does not have some negative impacts / trade offs. But if we want public services and infrastructure that work then raise taxes we must.  Personally I'm glad that she is has gone some way to narrowing the inheritance loop hole which was being used by rich individuals (who are not farmers) to avoid tax. She's slightly rebalanced the burden away from the young, putting it more on wealthier pensioners (who let's face it, have been disproportionately protected for many, many years). And the NICs increase, whilst undoubtedly inflationary, won't be directly passed on (some will, some will likely be absorbed by companies); it's better than raising it on employees, which would have done more to depress growth. Overall, I think she's sailed a prudent course through very choppy waters. The electorate needs to get serious... you can't have European style services and US levels of tax. Borrowing for tax cuts, Truss style, it is is not. Of course the elephant in the room (growing ever larger now Trump is in office and threatening tariffs) is our relationship with the EU. If we want better growth, we need a closer relationship with our nearest and largest trading block. We will at some point have to review tax on transport more radically (as we see greater up take of electric vehicles). The most economically rational system would be one of dynamic road pricing. But politically, very difficult to do
    • Labour was right not to increase fuel duty - it's not just motorists it affects, but goods transport. Fuel goes up, inflation goes up. Inflation will go up now anyway, and growth will stagnate, because businesses will pass the employee NIC hikes onto customers.  I think farms should be exempt from the 20% IHT. I don't know any rich famers, only ones who work their fingers to the bone. But it's in their blood and taking that, often multi-generation, legacy out of the family is heart-breaking. Many work to such low yields, and yet they'll often still bring a lamb to the vet, even if the fees are more than the lamb's life (or death) is worth. Food security should be made a top priority in this country. And, even tho the tax is only for farms over £1m, that's probably not much when you add it all up. I think every incentive should be given to young people who want to take up the mantle. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...