This kind of question is quite common.
There may be a provision to increase the ground rent in the 1963 lease but, unless there is, it is fixed. It is likely to be fixed.
If that is the case, you have to consider the financial implications that if you paid the ground rent for the next hundred years, it is only £880 as opposed to £3000 to buy the freehold. Add, say, £500 of legal costs on top of that, you are probably paying about £1500 over the odds.
The people that are offering the opportunity to buy the freehold have probably bought hundreds of them at the same time for a knockdown price and that’s why they are offering them for sale quite simply because the cost of collecting £8.80 ground rent, whilst it was a good incoming 1963, now it’s going to cost more to collect the money than they have money coming in.
Some people like owning the freehold of the house but with a 999 year lease, it’s debatable whether it’s worth owning or not. There may be a provision whereby you have to ask for the freeholders consent to do work and it would mean that you would not have to ask for that consent. Some leases allow for the freehold charge for that consent and that alone could be a couple of hundred pounds if the lease does not specify otherwise.
The difficulty you have is that if you want to argue over whether the cost to buy the freehold is reasonable or not, it’s going to cost you times that in legal costs if you lose.
Can I clarify anything for you?
Please rate the service positive. It’s an important part of the process by which experts get paid. It does not cost you anything but helps me greatly.