Section 61 and my Landlords rights for an order of possesion

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

  • andyg1
    replied
    Thank you to all that have commented

    Leave a comment:


  • sgclacy
    replied
    Based upon the activity of the freeholder buying 8 of the other 12 flats, I would image that the OP will not have to wait 55 years before he gets approached by the freeholder to see if a deal can be struck - obviously he can reject such overtures in that period -

    Leave a comment:


  • Macromia
    replied
    Originally posted by sgclacy View Post
    Realistically, a commercial minded organization would, before incurring significant legal costs making an application, have nothing to lose by approaching the lessee and being prepared to offer slightly than the market price.
    I agree completely.

    But...
    If that same commercially minded organisation already knew that one of the leaseholders they needed to move was determined to stay put, it may instead make commercial sense for them to one offer the market price for all flats, and then put the additional thousand or two (or whatever) towards the the legal fees that they will have to incur anyway because of that one leaseholder.

    Usually I would expect most leaseholders in this situation to be willing to sell at just above market price, knowing that a court would be likely to grant the request - but if I was the freeholder I wouldn't pay much over the market price if I considered it likely that I would still need to go to court to get one or more leaseholders out.

    It all depends on what the lowest total price would be expected to be.

    Leave a comment:


  • sgclacy
    replied
    Realistically, a commercial minded organization would, before incurring significant legal costs making an application, have nothing to lose by approaching the lessee and being prepared to offer slightly than the market price. Nobody will know of course what will happen, as it is some 55 years into the future. I would be more worried in the meantime about a possible meteorite hitting the earth on 26 August 2032

    https://qz.com/139875/what-it-would-...u-survived-it/

    Leave a comment:


  • Macromia
    replied
    Originally posted by sgclacy View Post
    Realistically, the chances are that they would offer slightly more than market value to avoid the stress and bother of making an application to the court.
    That's quite possible - but it would depend on the freeholder and on whether or not they think that any leaseholders will refuse to sell voluntarily (I doubt that it would cost much more to get court orders requiring several leaseholders to sell than just one).

    Leave a comment:


  • sgclacy
    replied
    In 55 years time, you may be faced with the possibility that the freehold is able to buy your flat at its market value.

    You undertook that exercise in 2008 so if you were just 21 then this "problem" would concern you when you are 90 - if freeholder can satisfy the court about their intentions they could acquire it for its market value. Realistically, the chances are that they would offer slightly more than market value to avoid the stress and bother of making an application to the court.

    Leave a comment:


  • Macromia
    replied
    Originally posted by andyg1 View Post
    Thank you . Would my solicitor have been able to extend the lease without this new clause ?
    No, not without the freeholder's agreement.

    The clauses in the 1993 Act that enabled statutory lease extensions say that a clause allowing potential purchase in accordance with section 61 should be included in the new lease (and if a non-statutory extension is sought the freeholder can insist on pretty much any clause they like being included, as long as it doesn't contradict any legislation, or refuse the extension).

    Leave a comment:


  • andyg1
    replied
    Thank you . Would my solicitor have been able to extend the lease without this new clause ?

    I am comfortable with the fact the property will remain mortgageable for any future buyer , less comfortable that the property value may be reduced as a result of the development clause . Presumably there must be stacks of properties with similar issues .

    Leave a comment:


  • Macromia
    replied
    Originally posted by andyg1 View Post
    Thank you Gordon i would take the 999 year lease if it removes the Development Clause
    It is highly unlikely that any changes will remove redevelopment clauses that would allow freeholders to demolish/redevelop property at the end of the original lease term.

    Leave a comment:


  • Macromia
    replied
    Originally posted by Gordon999 View Post
    You need to consult a solicitor on whether you are selling a flat with 55 years lease or 130 years lease. I do not think L forum can answer your question.
    Why?

    The new lease grants a term of 192 years from 25th March 1978.

    This means that the flat is leased until 2170.
    If you sold the property now, the buyer has 148 unexpired years remaining.

    What the 2077 clause means is that, in 2077 (when there would still be 93 years remaining if there are no other changes) the freeholder can ask the court to allow them to, in effect, force the leaseholder to sell them the property so that the block can be demolished or redeveloped. The freeholder would have to pay whatever the property would be realistically valued at on the open market if it was NOT going to be redeveloped and was being sold as a 93 year lease.

    Leave a comment:


  • andyg1
    replied
    Thank you Gordon i would take the 999 year lease if it removes the Development Clause

    Leave a comment:


  • andyg1
    replied
    Thank you Gordon i would take the 999 year lease if it removes the Development Clause

    Leave a comment:


  • Gordon999
    replied
    You need to consult a solicitor on whether you are selling a flat with 55 years lease or 130 years lease. I do not think L forum can answer your question.

    Also you should ask solicitor whether you should extend the lease to 999 years after the laws are changed next year ?

    Leave a comment:


  • andyg1
    replied
    Firstly than you for taking time to reply and i have typed out the demise 1. that i was concerned about . I can see i have mistakenly used the date 2050 rather than 2150 for the Section 61 for development . This seems now not be a concern . However what effect does the clause for the 12 months preceding December 2077 ,which would have been the end of the original lease , on the value , saleability of and mortgage issues for a buyer ?

    Does this also mean the only way i would achieve full market value of any sale would be if the the Lessor purchased the flat in those 12 months in 2077 or that date passes ? Otherwise it appears if i sold the flat to a new leaseholder they inherit the possibility of their lease only protecting them for 55 years or until 2077 , assuming the Lessor chose to apply Section 61 ?

    Thanks Again

    Leave a comment:


  • andyg1
    replied
    In consideration of the sum of Nine Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds (£9750 ) receipt of which the Lessor herby acknowledges The Lessor with limited title guarantee demised to the Lessee the Premises To Hold the Premises to the Lessee for a term of 172 years from 25th March 1978 Together With the rights granted by the Existing lease but Excepting and Together With the rights granted by the Existing Lease but Excepting and Reserving to the Lessor the right (a) at any time during the period of 12 months ending 25th December 2077 and (b) at any tie during the period of 5 years ending on 25th December 2150 to apply to the court under Section 61 of the Act for an order of possession of the Premises on the ground that for the purposes of redevelopment it intends to demolish or reconstruct or to carry out substantial works of construction on the whole or a substantial part of any premises in which the flat is contained and that he could not reasonably do so without obtaining possession of the Premises and the provisions of that section and of Schedule 14 to the Act shall apply accordingly And Also excepting and reserving to the Lessor the matters excepted and reserved by the Existing Lease Yielding and Paying Firstly a rent of one peppercorn per annum ( if demanded ) And Secondly on demand such sums as are payable under the tenant's covenants in the Existing Lease and Thirdly on demand all other sums payable by the Lessee hereunder

    Leave a comment:

Latest Activity

Collapse

Working...
X