I've come across this on houses before in north Liverpool (eg; Crosby) where land from former large estates was sold and developed. There it was nothing to worry about, it was more a historic thing and the ground rent was truly nominal, with very long leaseholds as you indicate.
Where it's more insidious is in the newer usage by major building firms, who own and keep the freehold, thereby casting all the buyers of the new houses they build and sell as leaseholders. Their game is to dynamise the ground rents, so that in a generation or two, these become very substantial yields to the company. Of course it could also then act as an impediment to selling on the properties.
Hope what little I know is of relevance to you, DB. Good luck in whatever you decide.
had a report back saying that the house I'm looking at buying is registered with "Good Title", meaning that there was no evidence of who owned the freehold title. The lease is for 999 years, started in 1933, and a nominal ground rent is payable.
Just a bit concerned about future marketability, there are clauses like "You may not alter or extend the property without consent of the landlord" - since the landlord is (a) unknown and (b) almost certainly dead, it would seem to be pretty difficult to obtain consent for anything. On the flipside, it's unlikely they are going to be around to complain about anything.
The current owner has breached this clause by having the kitchen extended and has had to take out indemnity insurance to cover it.
Sounds like a technicality more than anything, and am really keen on the house, but are there any grounds for concern? I know leaseholds are common for flats but not so much for houses.
Going to seek advice elsewhere but this place is usually good on a whole range of issues so thought I'd ask!
Thanks in advance for any advice.