The 7th Seal

[raven2]

On 11/21/2017 at 1:48 AM, Alex said:

No, it's a lease alright. What confuses people is that even the lease is incredibly valuable because of its prime location. Church owns the building but not the land. Church could have set out the lease to run past 2038 but deliberately didn't bother, hence the questions to Pres Hinckley asking why this is.

As I recall, there's also some trickiness in the lease itself as the church couldn't obtain the lease for a chapel but had to call it a cultural centre with a chapel attached- the visitors centre is not just a missionary tool but meets the requirements of the lease. That road is zoned for cultural purposes, hence the V & A being a few doors along the road and the Science Museum being across the road and the Royal Albert Hall being at the Hyde Park end of the road,

Here, this explains the definition of leasehold, as opposed to freehold:

https://www.gov.uk/leasehold-property

See, having an end date to ownership is what raised the question posed in the church news to begin with.

I know this thread is a little old but I did want to respond to this comment about the Hyde Park building. The church not only owns the building but the land it is on. There is no need for a ‘lease’. This would also mean that President Hinckley has no reason to be asked or to respond to a supposed question about the Hyde Park building, 2038 or its relationship to the Saviors second coming.

“The Church bought the land for the Hyde Park building when not a single member lived within a seven-mile radius; the site had remained empty since being bombed in World War II.“

Source: Hyde Park building in London to be beacon of light, hope, truth to all the world - Church News July 13, 2012.

Edited September 26, 2020 by raven2