lease Consent to let from freeholder

[hs001jde]

Good morning hubbers,

 

I'm looking for a quick bit of advice from someone who has good knowledge of leases and getting consent to let from a freeholder.

 

From what I have read previously in forums it seems that if a lease holder wants to sub let they always need consent from the freeholder and have to pay some kind of admin fee and send documents such as the AST and tenant references to the freeholder (or agent working for the freeholder).  My question is, is this always the case?  The reason I ask is because I approached the managing agent of my freeholder and asked them about getting consent to let my leasehold property.  At first they told me there would be a fee and they would require the documentation I mentioned above.  I looked at my lease and found that there was no mention of having to pay any fee to gain consent to sub let and no mention of even having to get any type of consent.  I went back to the same managing agent and queried this and they immediately said I was right and that I did not need any kind of written consent as it is written in to my lease.  This has left me slightly confused.  I've never heard of a lease not requiring these things to get consent to sub let.  Has anyone else experienced this?

 

Kind regards

 

James

[Michael Swallow]

Hi James,

 

I agree my understanding is more modern leases incorporate consent.

 

Kind regards

 

Michael  

[BernieWales]

Whether you need consent from the freeholder depends entirely upon the exact wording of the lease. There is no general rule.

 

Freeholders ... and some managing agents ... sometimes write to BTL landlords telling them they need consent and asking for (say) £250.  Quite often uninformed BTL leaseholders will pay.  It's quite an easy way for slightly less than honest freeholders to get cash easily.