Reasonable Costs?

[mheart]

Hi,

Going through Leasehold extension currently. Freeholders valuer stated that he would charge me an extra £1000 on top of the premium quoted in case of LVT which i have since learnt from forum members is incorrect for him to do this as both sides are expected to cover their own costs at LVT.

So my question is; Is it possible to use the Leasehold Reform 1993 Act to challenge this? The word ''reasonable' is often mentioned in the act in terms of Leaseholders costs so could this be regarded as an unreasonable cost?

Has anyone else had this problem? If so what was the outcome?

Cheers,

Didier

[Gordon999]

You can download the rules on "LVT applications for judgement on reasonableness" from www.lease-advice.org

[mheart]

Thanks for the link. I guess for 'reasonableness' to apply then i would have to be operating within the Act. Therefore, if i am outside of it i will have less scope...is this a fair assumption?

[Gordon999]

The same link will give access to past reports on LVT judgements . You can search for past cases of lease extension and see what judgements were made on costs .

You should be making a claim for statutory 90 years extension and get the ground rent reduced to peppercorn as future sale with NO ground rent to pay is better for you.

[mheart]

Hello,

I have nearly managed to agree a premium with the freeholder for a 90 year extension. However, this issue around the surveyor asking for an extra £1000 on top of the premium still exists. I don't know if it's just me who has difficulty with the leasehold advice website but it still isn't clear to me whether it is right or not that the freeholders surveyor should ask for an extra £1000 on top of the premium. I know that i am liable for their reasonable costs ie; surveyors costs to value the lease extension and legal costs and that's fine, but at tribunal? Is it right and normal for them to ask me for an extra £1000 on top?

[leaseholdanswers]

Well you are responsible for the landlord's costs, in this case a fee of £1000 which they have very helpfully outlined if you have to go to LVT.

Many might be surprised to have a bill and the amount-at least you know.

If you were arguing over say £1000 on the premium, knowing these costs might make you realise that you may as well agree.... if you are agreed on the price, then there is no need to go to LVT.

[mheart]

Thanks, this conflicts with other information that some other members have given to me though, which is that at Tribunal each party is responsible for their own costs and so it would be incorrect for them to ask for an additional fee relating to LVT costs. I know it all balances out in the end; that is whether i instruct my own surveyor and pay them a fee or pay an extra fee to the freeholders surveyor, but i want to be clear.

[leaseholdanswers]

How can I put this... yes it is as broad as it is long if you choose to use a surveyor yourself.

But if they try to charge you for their costs at the LVT they cannot as you say do so. That does not mean that the costs that you are liable for do not include an element , in the process of giving advice to their clients which explore the option and consequences, even a degree or preparation for, of either party going to the LVT.

Any surveyor will know that, and therefore the presentation of an additional costs is an "incentive" to agree informally. The burden would be on you to prove that their costs are unreasonable and include and element which they are not allowed to charge for. The cost and time of exploring this could easily be £1000 in itself, so it pays to simply ask for it as, in most cases " they can get away with it".

It's a bit sneaky, but the aspect of fees is not cut and dried. I would be confident that it could be excluded.

"Ask for it- if they got to LVT and we lose it, so be it" is not an uncommon approach.

[mheart]

Thankyou for your help with this question. You have made it easier to understand.