You are reading a single comment by @ReekBlefs and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
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.
ReekBlefs
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.