LVT - Decided

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

    LVT - Decided

    Here is an LVT Case of interest to me. http://www.lease-advice.org/decision...-9000/8346.pdf

    My situation is that I am witholding payment of Service Charges as the Summary of Rights sent to me by my landlord doesnt fulfill all the obligations required by Statute Law.

    I have been think along the lines of the above LVT case where the Tribunal conclude nothing is payable and thats it, they don't go onto decide the 'reasonableness' issue.

    I believe that recent LVT (and UT appeals) have made it clear that LVT's should only be judicated on strict issues put before it by the applicant (and perhaps bought up by the respondent in his reply/defence) and that if the very first issue is that the service fcharge is not payable it should end there.

    IF a valid demand is reserved THEN the question of reasonableness could be discussed, of course many LVT's like to combine the two decisions often commented IF/WHEN a valid demand is sent then the service charge would be £xxx.

    It not really clear though that when the FH makes his application (in my case it is very likely to be a CC claim and the POC say something like 'The leaseholder owes £xxx under terms of the lease' what exactly is he asking the LVT ?. Is he asking whether the amount is payable at all or does he wish to discuss reasonableness ?

    Anyone understand my gibberish ?

    Andy
    Advice given is based on my experience representing myself as a leaseholder both in the County Court and at Leasehold Valuation Tribunals.

    I do not accept any liability to you in relation to the advice given.

    It is always recommended you seek further advice from a solicitor or legal expert.

    Always read your lease first, it is the legally binding contract between leaseholder and freeholder.

    #2
    Yes, I understand.

    I think it very unlikely it will work out how you want it to. There's no guarantee the case will be transferred and even if it is the LVT will probably decide on whether to decide on reasonableness too.
    I accept no legal responsibility for comments/advice I make on this forum. Please check with a solicitor before acting on statements made in a public forum.

    Comment


      #3
      Thats what Im thinking and if Im careful I could rob myself of the chance of discussing the reasonableness costs which I want to and feel I will be succesful but my above method may have forced the FH to make a second application.

      I think Ill say to court at AQ stage, I believe there is no need for LVT transfer at this stage as its a simple black n white question of law BUT should it be transfered I wish to bring up the issue of reasonableness too.

      Andy
      Advice given is based on my experience representing myself as a leaseholder both in the County Court and at Leasehold Valuation Tribunals.

      I do not accept any liability to you in relation to the advice given.

      It is always recommended you seek further advice from a solicitor or legal expert.

      Always read your lease first, it is the legally binding contract between leaseholder and freeholder.

      Comment


        #4
        andydd,

        I wish more people thought like you

        Comment


          #5
          You could always make an application for a Summary Judgement if it's a matter of the LL failing to supply a summary of rights and obligations. I think that would pretty much rule out the possibility of a transfer to the LVT.
          I accept no legal responsibility for comments/advice I make on this forum. Please check with a solicitor before acting on statements made in a public forum.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by siva View Post
            You could always make an application for a Summary Judgement if it's a matter of the LL failing to supply a summary of rights and obligations. I think that would pretty much rule out the possibility of a transfer to the LVT.
            Well..funny you should mention that, I did that last time as their claim was a duplicate of an older (already struck out) claim (abuse of process) where I was succesfully BUT the Judge did indicate that if it was just my secondary argument (invalid demand) she would of sent it to LVT and let them decide, so now Ive had a heads up, Ill prob avoid this method (SJ carries a cost risk as its pre allocation so small claims rules dont apply).

            Andy
            Advice given is based on my experience representing myself as a leaseholder both in the County Court and at Leasehold Valuation Tribunals.

            I do not accept any liability to you in relation to the advice given.

            It is always recommended you seek further advice from a solicitor or legal expert.

            Always read your lease first, it is the legally binding contract between leaseholder and freeholder.

            Comment


              #7
              That was a silly decision, the Act and the SI are crystal clear- no summary, withold. sadly you never what area the DJ is experienced in.

              Quote of my career, DJ at Kingston County Court 1991 " The Rent Act, wasn't that just abolished? I only deal with family law- pass me the ground book"

              What would you be asking for a summary due for, all they can say is that failure to include gives you a right to withold, nothing else. The court is therefore simply unable to act on the issues raised.. Sensibly they would adjourn the hearing in order for the summary to be supplied.

              I am waiting for a landlord to use the Miranda argument, that the Miranda rights are so well know from entertainment that a person is not prejudiced by not having been informed of them. Perhaps the same should apply to a regular LLZ poster!
              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


                #8
                Originally posted by leaseholdanswers View Post
                That was a silly decision, the Act and the SI are crystal clear- no summary, withold.

                What would you be asking for a summary due for, all they can say is that failure to include gives you a right to withold, nothing else. The court is therefore simply unable to Act. Sensibly they would adjourn the hearing in order for the summary to be supplied.

                I am waiting for a landlord to use the Miranda argument, that the Miranda rights are so well know from entertainment that a person is not prejudiced by not having been informed of them. Perhaps the same should apply to a regular LLZ poster!
                Well..it wasnt a decision, just a comment, but now I know how she might act in future.

                I agree though, it should be invalid Summary, end of..Of course it would no doubt be resent but this would (rightly so) costs the FH time and money.

                This is a very similar case, my FH v Local Leaseholder - http://www.lease-advice.org/decision...-5000/4246.pdf, in first paragraph it is clear that nothing is owing but they decide that 'while we are all here lets discuss the service charge amounts IF they were payable', no doubt this is a good use of everyones time and resources but I'm not convinced it is legally correct especially in light of many recent Upper Tribunal appeals which limited the issues/juridstiction of LVT's.

                Andy
                Advice given is based on my experience representing myself as a leaseholder both in the County Court and at Leasehold Valuation Tribunals.

                I do not accept any liability to you in relation to the advice given.

                It is always recommended you seek further advice from a solicitor or legal expert.

                Always read your lease first, it is the legally binding contract between leaseholder and freeholder.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by andydd View Post
                  Well..it wasnt a decision, just a comment,
                  No no no sorry silly decision by the Judge. I thought it would be clear in context.
                  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


                    #10
                    Originally posted by andydd View Post

                    I agree though, it should be invalid Summary, end of..Of course it would no doubt be resent but this would (rightly so) costs the FH time and money.

                    This is a very similar case, my FH v Local Leaseholder - http://www.lease-advice.org/decision...-5000/4246.pdf, in first paragraph it is clear that nothing is owing but they decide that 'while we are all here lets discuss the service charge amounts IF they were payable', no doubt this is a good use of everyones time and resources but I'm not convinced it is legally correct especially in light of many recent Upper Tribunal appeals which limited the issues/juridstiction of LVT's.

                    Andy
                    if the LL is prepared they would print it off and hand it to you there and then.

                    it snot simply full stop, they are faced with a bill which you are entitled by statute to withhold payment of. All they can do is say that the landhold cannot pursue the matter, but cannot say anything about the issues at all,or call an adjournment.

                    As to the other comments about the LVT I think they are correct and were also wrong - based on your post.

                    Again, the tenant can withhold payment, but that does not and should not stop the LVT from considering the SC if either's application was disputing charges.
                    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


                      #11
                      In the case I linked the crux is that the LVT comment "Given
                      the preparation made by the parties and the time and effort they have
                      put in on the issue of insurance we went on to determine the
                      contribution to the cost of insurance incurred"
                      .

                      I wonder what would happen if my Court defence said simply, It's unpayable because of invalid Summary..blah blah and my LVT bundle says the same and that I don't bring up the issue or reasonableness at all ?

                      There have been UT appeals on this, saying if a party is only arguing about non-payability the issue of reasonableness cannot be used and visa versa.

                      Of course I WILL wish to bring the issue of reasonableness but dont feel I should be obliged to in the first instance.

                      Andy
                      Advice given is based on my experience representing myself as a leaseholder both in the County Court and at Leasehold Valuation Tribunals.

                      I do not accept any liability to you in relation to the advice given.

                      It is always recommended you seek further advice from a solicitor or legal expert.

                      Always read your lease first, it is the legally binding contract between leaseholder and freeholder.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by leaseholdanswers View Post
                        if the LL is prepared they would print it off and hand it to you there and then.
                        True....although if I was unprepared for that and it lead onto the issue of reasonableness for which I was unprepared an adjournment would surely be reasonable.

                        I wonder exactly if the issue of reasonableness is indeed transfered from the court ?. All the previous CC claims from the FH have simply said £xx is payable, they dont say anything along the lines of "£xx is payable and we believe it is reasonable and we would like LVT to examine it for reasonableness', in fact, I believe they know full well they on the issue of insurance they are almost certainly going to get a beating and it would be reduced by approx 50%.

                        Andy
                        Advice given is based on my experience representing myself as a leaseholder both in the County Court and at Leasehold Valuation Tribunals.

                        I do not accept any liability to you in relation to the advice given.

                        It is always recommended you seek further advice from a solicitor or legal expert.

                        Always read your lease first, it is the legally binding contract between leaseholder and freeholder.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          But the issue of pay ability doesnt arise on the Summary its simply a right to withhold. A defence or claim would be simply to support that assertion.

                          I ma not sure where your case is but I would be tempted to seek the court's direction to

                          a confirm the right to withold

                          b refer matters of SC costs to the LVT

                          c ditto on pay ability in so far as whether a cost is in the first instance even recoverable- I recall your lease has more holes than a thing full of holes
                          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


                            #14
                            Trouble is with making an application to CC or LVT first is that I would have to pay (fees) to prove I dont owe something which would be a bit perverse, well, not even that to prove I can withold, this is course would then provide the FH with the details of why they are invalid.

                            He has already asked me, and I have simply told him I am using S21B to withold but not gone into the technicalities, I offered to provide my services to him to ensure his demands complied with the lease and the law for a fee..but he wasnt happy with this

                            Andy
                            Advice given is based on my experience representing myself as a leaseholder both in the County Court and at Leasehold Valuation Tribunals.

                            I do not accept any liability to you in relation to the advice given.

                            It is always recommended you seek further advice from a solicitor or legal expert.

                            Always read your lease first, it is the legally binding contract between leaseholder and freeholder.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Then you are really wanting to have a Mexican Standoff rather than a resolution.

                              I'd go back the reverse premium enfranchisement if I were you.
                              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

                              • Reply to Recurrent leaks from flat upstairs
                                by JK0
                                Do you have insurance for the contents? Maybe there is loss of rent cover included there.
                                18-05-2022, 06:11 AM
                              • Recurrent leaks from flat upstairs
                                by Ldawg
                                The flat I rent out has suffered from recurrent leaks from upstairs since I purchased it, 4 leaks in 4 years. It's caused me to lose one tenant already. I feel like there is no incentive for the owner upstairs to sort the problem (check the plumbing etc) as the cost is always covered by insurance and...
                                24-01-2022, 19:48 PM
                              • RTM director service charge arrears
                                by ARG
                                Hello, I am new here so please excuse me if this question has already been asked, but a search has drawn a blank.

                                I am a director of an RTM of a property with 25 flats. I would be very grateful if anyone here can advise whether a resident who is more than six months in arrears with his...
                                17-05-2022, 15:38 PM
                              • Reply to RTM director service charge arrears
                                by fos333
                                This is the important question, what are the reasons for non payment?

                                Have demands been correctly served including the correct summaries of rights and obligations?

                                Are the landlord obligations under the lease being carried out?

                                Have service charge end of year accounts...
                                17-05-2022, 21:48 PM
                              • Neighbour Dispute over Bins
                                by Tony-Edwards
                                Hello

                                I could do with some guidance if anyone has any knowledge on this.

                                I have a 100 year old flat that was split from a larger building in 2000 and has a 999 year lease, it is next door to a commercial premises.

                                The only way to get to my flat is across their...
                                17-05-2022, 14:40 PM
                              • Reply to Neighbour Dispute over Bins
                                by vmart
                                Is there a restrictive covenant in the title of the commercial-property owner (CPO) giving you and the other lessee a right of way over the land?

                                Is the CPO a freeholder or leaseholder of the land?

                                With regard to the point related to '20 years' you are referring to adverse...
                                17-05-2022, 21:06 PM
                              • Reply to RTM director service charge arrears
                                by vmart
                                The RTM can make a money claim online but as this enquiry concerns service charges the lessee will have the right to have the service charges determined unless already agreed. Depending upon the lessee's response to the claim, the County Court may refer the claim to the FTT.

                                What are the...
                                17-05-2022, 20:54 PM
                              • Reply to Recurrent leaks from flat upstairs
                                by Ldawg
                                Thanks for your response.

                                All costs are being covered by the management company. So currently I'm not actually losing out so I'm not really sure what I'm claiming for! More just the stress of it all. And the potential loss of earning and making unrentable/saleable as you say. Yes the floor...
                                17-05-2022, 20:22 PM
                              • Lease Extension - Relativity
                                by comm1985
                                Hoping to get some clarification,

                                If a flat (Outside Greater London) with 60 years left is sold for £110,000 and comparable properties with longer leases attain £160,000

                                What is the relativity in this case?

                                Would it be £110000 less 5.5% (to estimate for no act...
                                17-05-2022, 15:12 PM
                              • Reply to Lease Extension - Relativity
                                by comm1985
                                I for one would appreciate a more stable approach in deriving the premium...

                                In this instance what would

                                1. The sensible premium be?

                                A)£32000 (based on the value the actual short lease was just sold for i.e Relativity 65%)
                                or
                                B)£20,000 (based on graph...
                                17-05-2022, 20:19 PM
                              Working...
                              X