-
You should sell your place now and save yourself the hassle, frankly.
What's the estimated rental yield on it?
My concern is that you are betting a considerable amount of money that the market will improve in 2/3 years when there's not much to suggest that will happen. And you'll end up having to sell to claw back the stamp duty.
Inbetween you'll have all the hassle and responsibility of being a landlord whilst getting a 5,6,7%yield (or whatever) and no or negative capital appreciation.
FUNTIMEZ.
-
Speaking as a new buyer who bought a place with a 67 year lease earlier this year, I'd have been fine with a 90 year lease. Everything I read indicated that it was the point where the lease gets under 80 years that's the place where it begins to impact the price, so I would not have considered extension to be part of what I wanted you to do, and I wouldn't have requested a cut in asking price on that basis.
I suspcet most buyers will see it the way I saw it.
You are reading a single comment by @Hovis and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Howard
ReekBlefs
@Hovis
Thanks. I have an incentive to sell within 3 years as I could then claim back the additional home stamp duty I'm about to fork out for our new home. A rather eyewatering 21k. So I may just say screw it in 2 years and sell up, get that dosh back and live a simpler life. In which case the lease extension may be bad economy?
Maybe I should just decide in 2 years, the cost of extending in 2 years time probably won't be much different to now anyway.