Tenant of Leaseholder leaving property in common parts

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Tenant of Leaseholder leaving property in common parts

    I own the freehold of a small building (and a couple of the leases). One of the other leaseholders as let to a tenant who despite warning will not remove property (bicycles / push chairs) from common parts.

    The leaseholder (and therefore their tenant) does not have the right under the lease to store property in the common parts.

    I believe therefore that I am entitled to remove the bicycle.

    This seems drastic although as warnings are not doing the trick I wonder if anyone else has come across this and how they have handled it.

    When I remove the (expensive!) bike, can I just sell it for whatever price I can get or what?

    I fear this will end in a slanging match. The tenant is unreasonable. The leaseholder refuses to enforce or control them.

    (presumably I could also threaten to "forfeit" the lease?)

    Any thoughts gratefully received.

    #2
    Issue a tort notice and remove the bike when the time is up.

    Comment


      #3
      How and what is the cost please ?

      Comment


        #4
        https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/32

        Cost is the cost of the paper, the toner or ink and your time.

        If the bike is obstructing an escape route, you should move it to a nearby safe location, and notify that location to the owner.

        If you dispose of it, after they ignore the notice, you must handover the net proceeds of the sale, after storage costs and sale costs.

        However note that bicycles are serial numbered, and, even if you use the correct procedures, so you can't be accused of theft, any sale could be poisoned by reporting the cycle as stolen.

        You could threaten to forfeit the lease if you have such a clause in the lease. You could, presumably claim compensation for storage costs.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Jon66 View Post
          Issue a tort notice and remove the bike when the time is up.
          Not sure if that is appropriate. The person issuing the notice needs to be in possession of or in control of the bike.

          Comment


            #6
            It's trespassing on their property.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by leaseholder64 View Post
              It's trespassing on their property.
              True, but is the bike is "in the possession or under the control of a bailee" as required by section 12 of Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977?

              Comment


                #8
                Thank you very much everyone. A threat of bike removal (more seriously expressed than before) seems to have done the trick. (I hope it lasts...)
                Thanks

                Comment


                  #9
                  The fact the goods, in this case, the bike, is on the property is enough to satisfy s12 1, c.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Jon66 View Post
                    The fact the goods, in this case, the bike, is on the property is enough to satisfy s12 1, c.
                    I am not sure it is.

                    Section 12 starts: "This section applies to goods in the possession or under the control of a bailee".

                    There are four key words:

                    "goods": Is the bike goods? Yes, because the Act defines goods as including all chattels personal other than things in action and money.

                    "possession": Is the landlord in possession of the bike? "Possession" is a very wide word and a bit of a slippery concept. I am having difficulty seeing how the landlord can be in possession of the bike in any meaningful way if the bike owner has free use of the bike. The landlord has no proprietary interest in the bike nor is it in his custody.

                    "control": Is the landlord in control of the bike? It is difficult to see how he is. Without removing the bike he cannot prevent the bike owner (and indeed others) from using it. He cannot take the bike away so as to have control of it because the Act gives him no power to do so. The control must exist before the section applies.

                    "bailee": Is the landlord a bailee? I do not think so. The bike has not been given into the landlord's custody by the bike owner for the landlord to do work on it or look after it. The landlord cannot be an involuntary bailee because a bailment requires the bailee to have physical possession of the thing in question.

                    However you look at it it seems that a condition for the section to apply is that the landlord must be exercising significant control over the bike.

                    I am not saying there is no remedy in law, just that it looks like it is not available under section 12. The position is not though clear cut and I can see a County Court judge finding for the landlord, but it would be interesting to see what the Court of Appeal would make of the situtation.

                    Comment

                    Latest Activity

                    Collapse

                    • warning re capitalisation and deferment rates
                      sgclacy
                      Deferment Rate

                      In the case of Sportelli the deferment rate is accepted at 4.75% in almost all cases for houses and 5% for flats. The rate is, as we know, derived from the following formula

                      Deferment Rate = Risk Free Rate ("RFR") + Risk Premium ("RP") –...
                      31-08-2017, 00:51 AM
                    • Reply to warning re capitalisation and deferment rates
                      sgclacy
                      We are told the lease is down to 59 years and there was a review in 2014. So I assuming that the rent was adjusted in the 66 years of the term. Therefore the next review is in 28 years time.

                      28 years is too far away for it to be much use and relies on movement in capital values and therefore...
                      14-10-2019, 23:17 PM
                    • Management Company Costs
                      Harwood
                      Hello all

                      I wonder if somebody with "real life experience" could give me an indicative cost for a MC to manage 4 Leasehold flats within a converted building?
                      It is currently self managed by a limited Company comprising the 4 directors who are also shareholders of the freehold....
                      14-10-2019, 07:18 AM
                    • Reply to warning re capitalisation and deferment rates
                      leaseholder64
                      I didn't fully understand how the ground rent was calculated, but I got the impression it was escalating. That could actually increase the premium, as the usual nett present value computation is based on a ground rent that never changes.
                      14-10-2019, 23:08 PM
                    • Reply to warning re capitalisation and deferment rates
                      sgclacy
                      A lease ext will cost you on a 59 year lease with a ground rent of £785 pa annum and with a flat worth £175k extended something in the order of £28k plus costs

                      Therefore there is nothing to be made at buying it at £150k, in fact to deal with the stress and agro you need to be getting...
                      14-10-2019, 22:11 PM
                    • Reply to Management Company Costs
                      scot22
                      I would get information on outsourcing whatever you can. If he is not a director then not able to be part of Company management. As a shareholder can cause some hassle but will not be involved in decision making between AGMs....
                      14-10-2019, 21:32 PM
                    • Reply to warning re capitalisation and deferment rates
                      desamax
                      Thanks sgclacy

                      I’m looking at short leases with maybe onerous Ground rents, as a cash buyer If I can get the lease enfranchisement started before completion by the vendor, I can flip the property with the profit made once the lease has been extended. One property I have in mind has...
                      14-10-2019, 21:27 PM
                    • Reply to Management Company Costs
                      Harwood
                      Fair point, he would still be a shareholder in the Freehold.
                      The main problem was that any communication to him from the Company came from the Company Secretary (not me) who he then abused and harrased as though it was a personal issue.
                      The Company Secretary has, unsurprisingly resigned....
                      14-10-2019, 20:56 PM
                    • Reply to warning re capitalisation and deferment rates
                      sgclacy
                      A small ground rent will attract a higher capitalisation rate because the costs of collection weigh in more heavily on the smaller rent - very small rents possibly as high as 10%

                      capitalisation rates have often not been given a lot of discussion as the type of cases that go to the FTT are...
                      14-10-2019, 20:52 PM
                    • Reply to warning re capitalisation and deferment rates
                      desamax
                      If for instance a flat worth 175k on a long lease with a ground rent of £785pa
                      Would the valuation of an identical flat with a ground rent of £50pa or a peppercorn be worth slightly more? If the answer is yes how is the extra valuation worked out?
                      thanks....
                      14-10-2019, 20:22 PM
                    Working...
                    X