Company making County Court application by one director and NOT two?

[AndrewDod]

If a lessee is being taken to court over unpaid service charges, and other lessees try to prevent this from happening by asserting that the Company is not entitled to so act (for any reason other than the merits of the claim itself), I would have though that this, in and of itself would provide grounds for appointment of a manager by FTT.

So what are the merits of the claim, apart from calling the Director "clueless".

If the claim has no merit then why not defend it (if it turns on a dispute with regard to service charges, rather than simply non-payment, it will probably get referred to FTT anyway by the Court).

[Stacker]

Yes Andrew that is now what is going to happen, the leaseholders against are now frantically pulling together a notice first of all to serve on the directors and then ask for a determination by the FTT to appoint a manager. In the background whilst the County Court application is going on they will put in a defence and counterclaim and ask for the matter to be referred to the FTT -they are going to ask the FTT to consider all the unreasonable charges and previous appointment of rogue property manager who did diddly squat..

[Stacker]

I've just read our MOA and its states that "the document must also be signed by at least one authorised person in the presence of a witness who attests the signature:

Fo the purposes of this article an authorised person is - 1. any director of the company 2. the company secreatry (if any)or any person authorised by the directors for the purpose of signing documents to which the common seal is applied... None of these are oin the county court form. Its in breach of the company articles

[leaseholder64]

I think that a limited company would need more than one officer.

No. That requirement was removed by the 2006 Act. Probably most companies, given that companies are used by sole traders and but to let landlords, now only have one officer. Before that, it used to be that the wife was the company secretary.

[leaseholder64]

Cheers & thanks leaseholder: Do you have a reference for this please?

Note this from 2018...

https://www.landlordlawblog.co.uk/20...companies-act/
&
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44


Not an area I know much of so very possible it's been overturned... or doesn't apply in this case..

It looks like one of the signatures doesn't have to be that of a director, as long as there is a company seal. However, I imagine the reality is that many things are done with just one signature. Like leasehold law, company law is not enforced.

I

[Stacker]

It probably should state that the person signing is a director (see paragraph 3.4 of the Practice Direction to Part 22 of the Civil Procedure Rules):

3.4 Where a document is to be verified on behalf of a company or other corporation, subject to paragraph 3.7 below, the statement of truth must be signed by a person holding a senior position⁴ in the company or corporation. That person must state the office or position held.

They have not done this!