header-logo header-logo

10 October 2025 / Louise Uphill
Issue: 8134 / Categories: Opinion , Property , Leasehold
printer mail-detail

Leasehold reform: Unfinished business

231939
Rushed reform & delayed implementation: Louise Uphill on the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024

The days of the previous government, which culminated in the ‘wash-up’ of Bills including the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 (LAFRA 2024), sometimes feels like a distant era. But for the many leaseholders for whom that milestone was meant to herald long-awaited change, the wait continues.

LAFRA 2024 promised fairness, simplicity and reduced costs in what was portrayed as an overly complex and archaic system.

But a year on, the reality is far from transformative. Despite headline-grabbing proposals—from abolishing the payment of marriage value to introducing caps on ground rent and extending leases to 990 years—too few of the Act’s key provisions have been implemented. The market remains stalled, practitioners are in limbo, and leaseholders are left grappling with legal uncertainty, valuation dilemmas and a fundamental question: should they act now or wait?

A ‘dog’s dinner’?

LAFRA 2024 was passed in the closing days of the last Parliament. Many professionals working in leasehold enfranchisement warned

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll