Counter Notice - Leasehold Property (Repairs) Act 1938

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

    #16
    Hearing Listed - Freeholder Seeking Leave to Forfeit

    Originally posted by Esio Trot View Post
    After some moments of silence (it seemed like hours) the judge said that whilst taking on board Counsels comments, he regarded the action as better suited to Part 7 and for Multi Track.

    ...

    Directions leading to an expected trial date of Summer 2013 were then agreed.
    UPDATE

    The case has now been listed for hearing, and in the meantime the majority of the works necessary for the site to be termed "kept is a good and substantial state of repair" have been done.

    The freeholder has thus changed tactics, and having received a copy of their skeleton case outlined by their barrister, I didn't spot this straight away.

    The freeholder accepts that due to improvements undertaken so far, the court may dismiss the application provided the remaining works are done, or grants leave if the remaining works are not done withing a specified period. He is thus seeking costs whichever way the case goes and has submitted a costs schedule of over £30,000 (under s2 of the 1938 Act benefit of s146(3) LoPA 1925). If this is granted, then a levy will have to be raised against all 18 leaseholders of around £2,000 including defence costs.

    Depending on any timescale given, the management company might thus be forced into insolvency if it can't get the money off the leaseholders fast enough - and if this happens, he will have won after all.

    For those that have not read from the beginning, the freeholder main aim has been to get the headlease forfeited as he has planning permission to build more flats, but the headlease does not grant any access rights to anyone other than him, his contractors, the current leaseholders and their contractors (through the management company/headlease). Rather than negotiate an easement, he decided on the litigation route (not thinking that he would have had such a fight on his hands).
    On some things I am very knowledgeable, on other things I am stupid. Trouble is, sometimes I discover that the former is the latter or vice versa, and I don't know this until later - maybe even much later. Because of the number of posts I have done, I am now a Senior Member. However, read anything I write with the above in mind.

    Comment


      #17
      I don't have time to re read it all but of course you could allow the company to become insolvent and exercise right to manage and retain control.

      That threat might encourage him to negotiate a settlement and easement and not eat £30k of costs.
      Based on the information posted, I offer my thoughts.Any action you then take is your liability. While commending individual effort, there is no substitute for a thorough review of documents and facts by paid for professional advisers.

      Comment

      Latest Activity

      Collapse

      Working...
      X