S168

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

  • Macromia
    replied
    Originally posted by Anna1985 View Post
    Also, does anybody knows how long would it be for tribunal to process a case?

    Currently small claims court is saying like end of 2021...
    I suspect that even the relevant local tribunal can't answer that.
    It will depend on how many cases they already have waiting, and what restrictions are imposed between now and the date of any potential hearing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Anna1985
    replied
    sgclacy , thank you - very helpful.
    Is my understanding correct that I would need to contact mortgagee after I made an application to tribunal? And it would be done prior/post hearing?

    Also, does anybody knows how long would it be for tribunal to process a case?

    Currently small claims court is saying like end of 2021...

    Leave a comment:


  • sgclacy
    replied
    When you make the application under Section 168 (4) the Tribunal will request that you notify any mortgagee who has an interest in the flat to which you are taking action against.

    Needless to say the mortgagee will take the matter very seriously indeed and will appoint solicitors to protect their interest and may well exert the pressure you are looking to exert

    Leave a comment:


  • Anna1985
    replied
    I think I would be soon, although the application would be made in joint freeholder names

    Leave a comment:


  • Stacker
    replied
    That is interesting point you made Macromia, does anyone else have any experience of applying to the FTT as a freeholder (share I mean) for a determination that there is a breach of the lease?

    Leave a comment:


  • Macromia
    replied
    Originally posted by Anna1985 View Post
    [
    By lease leaseholders to maintain the property in good repair , the lease is self repairing and the freeholder has no obligations to maintain the property.
    The precise wording of the leases can still be important.

    If the wording can be interpreted to refer only to the demised premises, the lessee can legitimately argue that they are not obliged to contribute anything towards the maintenance of communal areas.
    If this is the case, and the freeholder has no repair obligations, a tribunal would have to be asked to determine who should pay for maintenance of communal areas on the basis that the lease is defective. There would be no guarantee that they would agree that the leaseholder had any obligation, and may rule that the cost of repairing any parts not specifically mentioned as being the responsibility of the leaseholders falls on the freeholders.

    Leave a comment:


  • Anna1985
    replied
    Macromia , thank you. We were already talking in another thread. I'm just reviewing all options prior taking action.

    By lease leaseholders to maintain the property in good repair , the lease is self repairing and the freeholder has no obligations to maintain the property.

    Leave a comment:


  • Macromia
    replied
    If the lease owned by the leaseholder who won't pay out for repairs requires them to keep their property properly maintained, and work with the other leaseholders to maintain common parts (including contributing a share of the costs), and also contains a forfeiture clause, then you could, as a co-freeholder, apply to a tribunal as a litigant in person to ask for a determination of a breach of lease.

    The tribunal would consider precisely what the leaseholder's obligations are under the lease, and whether or not they are meeting them.
    Things that you have to be aware of are that 'repair/maintain' obligations don't usually include any obligation to pay for improvements to a property (so, for example, if the solution for damp problems is to install some type of damp-proofing that wasn't in the original building, there may be no obligation to contribute to this), and the tribunal might not consider the lease to require the leaseholder to contribute to all repairs (some repairs might not be adequately covered in the lease, and may therefore be determined to be the responsibility of the freeholders without any opportunity for costs to be recouped from leaseholders).

    Leave a comment:


  • Anna1985
    replied
    Hi @Benzo,

    1) yes
    2) 3 leaseholders, one of them BTL and he keeps his property in disrepair and generally don't see any problem with the property 3) 2 co freeholders , I'm one of them
    4) no
    5) walls are in poor state, raising damp, penetrating damp, hall needs to be fully redecorated ( skirting boards etc), roof issues
    6) we have a porch threatening to collapse and when council have assessed it, they issued a letter before action - that is when the leaseholder accepted and paid for repairs

    7)none, I'm just using them a point of 3 party evidence to be used in court

    Leave a comment:


  • Benzo
    replied
    We don't understand your issue Anna, so people can't really help.

    1. Is the property yours?
    2. How many people are in it, how many leaseholders
    3. Is there a freeholder
    4. Is there a Managing Agent
    5. What is the issue with teh property
    6. What have you reported to the council
    7. What is the council's relationship to you

    Start from the top and imagine we're all clueless.

    Leave a comment:


  • Anna1985
    replied
    Hi Bumping the thread up.
    the freehold was sold with outstanding arreas and as much as we would like to start recouping some monies, would it jeopardise the possible forfeiture claim if we claim for them?
    the disrepair is ongoing for a while, and we are to formally demand the repairs to start.

    Leave a comment:


  • Anna1985
    replied
    Hi All, so nearly a year later. I'm now a freeholder (co). So my question is property is obviously getting no better. So what we would like to do is to issue the ground demand to the non participating leaseholder for the outstanding monies and then the question is just issue the list of all repairs or just the ones that need to be done as a priority and keep the list open i.e. this is the list of most urgent repairs something along this line not to loose the forfeiture option and not to make ourselves open to the defence of historical neglect?

    Leave a comment:


  • leaseholder64
    replied
    Section 168 of the Comonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 is the one that requires a tribunal to confirm a breach before the lessor can seek forfeiture. It really isn't relevant to the OP if they have no interest in the property, although I suppose someone else requesting the FTT judgement, if they are even allowed to, might save the lessor some work.

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga...15/section/168

    Leave a comment:


  • Gordon999
    replied
    Why is this thread called S168 ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Section20z
    replied
    Not odd at all, an odd lease would be one that has no repairing obligations on lessee.
    Enforcement would normally be down to Freeholder so suggest you contact him and point out that his property is being allowed to go to rack & ruin (and presumably all H&S legislation is also being ignored) if he doesn't help you can apply to FTT to appoint a manager but failings would need to serious and demonstrable.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Activity

Collapse

  • Lease variation
    by bazann
    Hi,
    My elderly mother [99 years+] owns a flat in a residential block under a 125 year Lease dated 24th May 1989. The Lessor is a housing association. My mother purchased the flat in early 2011 with the benefit of said Lease.
    There is the usual monthly service charge which includes e.g. maintenance...
    26-11-2020, 16:28 PM
  • Reply to Lease variation
    by Lawcruncher
    Whilst "resident warden" is clear, I am not sure that in the context of sheltered accommodation "residential warden" can be taken to mean something other than a resident warden. "Residential" is not a word I would use to describe a person. If the warden has until recently...
    27-11-2020, 08:43 AM
  • Insulation - necessity or improvement?
    by bethy
    We are L/H on a top floor flat. Roof is responsibility of F/H to maintain through service charge.

    A loft hatch was installed last year to give access to the roof space for roof repairs. This has shown that there is no insulation whatsoever in the roof space - the property was converted...
    26-11-2020, 12:37 PM
  • Reply to Insulation - necessity or improvement?
    by bethy
    It's a bit of a mess really, and a long story... They owned the whole building and ran a restaurant downstairs. Then converted upstairs into two flats to rent out. Then got into money problems and sold leaseholds to the flats. Service charges are split between restaurant and two flats. It's a terrace...
    27-11-2020, 00:03 AM
  • Reply to Insulation - necessity or improvement?
    by Macromia
    If there has never been any loft insulation, putting it in now would technically be an improvement, so the I suspect that the freeholder would be under no obligation to arrange for insulation to be installed.

    If the building was converted into flats "just over ten years ago",...
    26-11-2020, 21:56 PM
  • Yet more 'notice to underlet fees' £135 and going up!!
    by November26
    Hi

    I have been trawling the internet for updates to challenges around 'notice of underletting fees' and I'm not sure of the current position. My landlord is still playing ignorant and deeming their extortionate bi-annual amount 'reasonable'. Are there county court judgements or upper tribunal...
    25-11-2020, 18:02 PM
  • Reply to Yet more 'notice to underlet fees' £135 and going up!!
    by Macromia
    This information is crucial.

    If your lease states that underletting is allowed but you need to pay "notice to underlet" fees of £xxx biannually, and these fees are to be increased in line with inflation, there is unlikely to be any legal argument that helps you.

    ...
    26-11-2020, 21:32 PM
  • Forfeiture Procedure and Costs
    by Aboosimbel
    Dear Landlordzoners,

    This problem requires the advice of an experienced freeholder to help, as its a little complicated.

    I own a freehold of a house split into three flats (I also own one of the flats). One flat had been used as a brother since 2014 until the police finally...
    27-10-2020, 21:39 PM
  • Reply to Forfeiture Procedure and Costs
    by Aboosimbel
    Dear FlyingFeehold,
    Thanks for the reply. You're quite right First Tier Tribunal not Land Tribunal !!!. I take your point with the analogy of the barking dog, and I do agree. However I like to be in a position to have an informed conversation with Lawyers, and I think getting the opinion of people...
    26-11-2020, 19:35 PM
  • Reply to Insulation - necessity or improvement?
    by bethy
    Porgie,

    That's my understanding. Then really comes down to whose responsibility to do it/pay for it.
    26-11-2020, 16:45 PM
Working...
X