Enfranchising from a company I'm already a member of.

[Andrea Cunningham]

Surely all you need to do is declare independence and takeover the management of your block as a RTM company?

Who owns the freehold is irrelevant.

I suppose it's about the path of least resistance. An amicable separation, and a reasonable settlement with regards to the common parts.

But yes, RTM could.be fine as the freehold issue could be sidestepped in part. But the tricky questions about car park and communal grounds would remain.

[eagle2]

It has nothing to do with the enfranchisement legislation, you already own the freehold, manage the blocks and you are required to comply with the lease, Splitting the freehold makes no sense as you would need a valuation, one block is clearly worth more than the other. It could create a capital gains tax liability on the part disposal, You would then be faced with trying to amend the leases and why would half the members agree to pay more than their current contributions without some form of compensation? There would be substantial costs involved. You have not thought it through.

[eagle2]

An RTM for one block would not alter the service charge contributions, it would only complicate matters because it would be unable to make service charge demands without knowing the costs of the other block.

[Andrea Cunningham]

It has nothing to do with the enfranchisement legislation, you already own the freehold, manage the blocks and you are required to comply with the lease, Splitting the freehold makes no sense as you would need a valuation, one block is clearly worth more than the other. It could create a capital gains tax liability on the part disposal, You would then be faced with trying to amend the leases and why would half the members agree to pay more than their current contributions without some form of compensation? There would be substantial costs involved. You have not thought it through.

I don't own the freehold. The company that I'm a member of does. You don't seem to understand this subject very well at all, so PLEASE refrain from commenting any further.

[sgclacy]

It has nothing to do with the enfranchisement legislation, you already own the freehold, manage the blocks and you are required to comply with the lease, Splitting the freehold makes no sense as you would need a valuation, one block is clearly worth more than the other. It could create a capital gains tax liability on the part disposal, You would then be faced with trying to amend the leases and why would half the members agree to pay more than their current contributions without some form of compensation? There would be substantial costs involved. You have not thought it through.

The gain and the tax would fall on the existing freehold company , but if there is corporation tax to be paid on the gain, the funds will of course be there to meet the liability.

[eagle2]

The gain and the tax would fall on the existing freehold company , but if there is corporation tax to be paid on the gain, the funds will of course be there to meet the liability.

I doubt that the liability has been considered and I am not even sure that "the plan" is to provide for monies to be paid to the company.

[eagle2]

The correct way to proceed would be to call a meeting of members of the Company, explain your "plan" to the members and seek their approval, You ought to ask an independent person to advise the members whether or not to approve the "plan".

Before that stage, you need to consider your "plan" thoroughly,

[Andrea Cunningham]

The correct way to proceed would be to call a meeting of members of the Company, explain your "plan" to the members and seek their approval, You ought to ask an independent person to advise the members whether or not to approve the "plan".

Before that stage, you need to consider your "plan" thoroughly,

As I previously pointed out your "advice" isn't pertinent to the question, which was about the mechanics of RTE in this particular circumstance, not whether or not it is a good idea. So please, for that last time, keep your "advice" to yourself.

[eagle2]

As I suspected, you do not believe that the members of the Company would approve your half baked scheme. You should drop the scheme and resign as a director,

Lets get this straight, you want to remove your block from the existing Company and you want to leave that Company with only the other block yet the leaseholders of that block would only control 50% of the Company, Do you seriously consider that to be fair?

[Andrea Cunningham]

As I suspected, you do not believe that the members of the Company would approve your half baked scheme. You should drop the scheme and resign as a director,

Lets get this straight, you want to remove your block from the existing Company and you want to leave that Company with only the other block yet the leaseholders of that block would only control 50% of the Company, Do you seriously consider that to be fair?

Clearly you can't read, or can't be bothered to:

"An amicable divorce is what I'm after."

It wouldn't leave the leaseholders of the other block with only 50%. If the freehold were split, the people in our block would no longer qualify as per the articles as members of the original company. So the other block would have 100% control of their own block. You are just making up stuff as you go along.


Now for the last time, please stop clogging up this thread with your irrelevant, incorrect and annoying comments.

[jpkeates]

Now for the last time, please stop clogging up this thread with your irrelevant, incorrect and annoying comments.

You can't dictate who or how people respond on an open forum.

If you check your profile, there is an option to hide posts from people that you do not wish to see, although it might disrupt the flow of the forum.
That's quite useful if you find the responses of someone undesirable.

[eagle2]

If you expect to receive advice, you should supply all the relevant information,

If you want "an amicable divorce", arrange a meeting of members as suggested and enquire what the other members want,

[Andrea Cunningham]

You can't dictate who or how people respond on an open forum.

If you check your profile, there is an option to hide posts from people that you do not wish to see, although it might disrupt the flow of the forum.
That's quite useful if you find the responses of someone undesirable.

Sure - but it is sending this thread completely off on a tangent because someone else has a bee in his bonnet. Hence my frustration.

[Moderator2]

These are discussion forums, largely providing advice, but not necessarily limited to purely the scope of a question. So, the correct way to respond to comments that you might think irrelevant is to not reply. If you truly feel that comments are diverting a thread in an unwanted direction then contact a moderator (me), but please don't instruct other forum members to stop contributing.

[Andrea Cunningham]

These are discussion forums, largely providing advice, but not necessarily limited to purely the scope of a question. So, the correct way to respond to comments that you might think irrelevant is to not reply. If you truly feel that comments are diverting a thread in an unwanted direction then contact a moderator (me), but please don't instruct other forum members to stop contributing.

- I asked, I didn't instruct. And I've blocked them so I'll no longer see their irrelevant content.