LVT - Decided

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

    #16
    Reverse premium enfranchisement? Is that where the freeholder pays the lessees to take it off his hands? I like the sound of that.
    To save them chiming in, JPKeates, Theartfullodger, Boletus, Mindthegap, Macromia, Holy Cow & Ted.E.Bear think the opposite of me on almost every subject.

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by leaseholdanswers View Post
      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.
      I have often wondered about this. I guess it depends on where the Judge sits on these formalities. In the CC case I was involved in the Judge was very strict on failure by the LL under s47 LTA 1987.

      From memory (not always the best) I remember an LVT decision where they decided it was a breach of process to bring a CC case without the summary of rights/obligations (obviously it's not their decision). This was the famous case involving inclusion of the statutory instrument rather than the summary which the SI described. It went to appeal and the LT reproduced the LVT's opinion in regard to the abuse of process argument but didn't say whether they agreed with it or not. They did rule that the SI did not satisfy the legislation.

      The obvious retort to being served a summary of rights at the hearing would be to write a cheque for the costs you deem reasonable and ask the Judge to award you costs and transfer the case 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


        #18
        Originally posted by JK0 View Post
        Reverse premium enfranchisement? Is that where the freeholder pays the lessees to take it off his hands? I like the sound of that.
        Me too.. I am surprised he is so keen to hang onto it, the ground rent is £30 (after charging me £75 for years), I havn't paid (legitimately) any service charges for 5 years, he has refunded me approx £2500 and spent £5k-£10k in legal costs.

        I also doubt whether he has got much money from the other LH.

        I agree it is a bit of a stand off but things have improved slowly over tye years, all thats left to resolve in high insurance and driveway maintanence.

        Recent comments by the Judge and a new solicitor have been welcomed though, although mediation was painful..mainly becuse he appeared to have nho clue as to what was going on.

        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


          #19
          Originally posted by JK0 View Post
          Reverse premium enfranchisement? Is that where the freeholder pays the lessees to take it off his hands? I like the sound of that.
          It is and I have done it more than once but I am afraid it's not one I am going to give away for free, sorry
          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


            #20
            Originally posted by siva View Post
            I have often wondered about this. I guess it depends on where the Judge sits on these formalities. In the CC case I was involved in the Judge was very strict on failure by the LL under s47 LTA 1987.
            Its not so much formalities but that the respondent should have mentioned it in their defence. Failing to do so is itself an abuse of process, technically, but also it is disingenuous to retrospectively assert that you withheld something on a right that you were then unaware of.

            Moreover it depends what the claim stated was.Some items could still be heard.

            If a summary is proffered then either side should ask for adjournment and leave to amend the proceedings, it need only be for a few minutes to agree to go to the LVT, while another case is being heard- judges like parties who sort it out and costs are less heinous. They can also say that I am still withholding it. its a big card to obtain and force the LL to discuss.


            I am more interested in the case of Tesco vs LHA. An item ordered today was substituted, without saying so, with an item which they refuse to believe was sent to me as its not on their website..... which is rather like saying I insist the case be heard even though the law says I cant because I didn't serve the summary.
            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


              #21
              Originally posted by leaseholdanswers View Post
              Its not so much formalities but that the respondent should have mentioned it in their defence. Failing to do so is itself an abuse of process, technically, but also it is disingenuous to retrospectively assert that you withheld something on a right that you were then unaware of.
              Yes, it should be mentioned in the defence or in the application for a summary judgement (if that's how they work. I've not looked into them). That is of course if you knew about it at that time.

              I believe that you are entitled to withhold, that's obviously the intention of the legislation. In fact I think the freeholder should be penalised in some way for not providing them (other than loss of interest). There is time sensitive information (s21 LTA 1987) in there. An unscrupulous LL could withold them to deprive the tenant of the chance to demand a summary of service charges for the last accounting period.


              I am more interested in the case of Tesco vs LHA. An item ordered today was substituted, without saying so, with an item which they refuse to believe was sent to me as its not on their website
              Good luck with that one!
              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

              Latest Activity

              Collapse

              • Reply to collective enfranchisement
                by flyingfreehold
                at risk of answering my own question, the leaseholder has to prove title which is a bit difficult if not registered........
                21-05-2022, 21:23 PM
              • collective enfranchisement
                by flyingfreehold
                Does a leaseholder have to be a registered proprietor to join a collective? Or is it sufficient for her/his/it to be a transferee whose interest is not yet registered?
                21-05-2022, 18:51 PM
              • Reply to Building works & S20 process
                by scot22
                It is relatively simple to administer process. However, definitely engage professional to define necessary work and project manage.

                If I can, anybody can.
                21-05-2022, 20:19 PM
              • Building works & S20 process
                by RichA
                Hi. I have a freehold after selling a leasehold flat in a block of 4 flats. We don't currently have a managing agent, so these duties currently fall to me (I am holding off appointing a managing agent whilst the leaseholders consider whether they want to RTM).

                The block needs some maintenance...
                21-05-2022, 17:20 PM
              • Reply to collective enfranchisement
                by Tipper
                Ask lease-advice.org
                21-05-2022, 18:59 PM
              • Reply to Levy
                by scot22
                Thanks Gordon. There was no info other than amount and invoice which explained nothing !
                21-05-2022, 17:16 PM
              • Reply to Share of feehold/shared service charges?
                by Macromia
                They are correct that the purchase of the freehold has no relevance (although it would allow the three of you to alter the leases if you are all in agreement).

                Unless you alter the leases you continue to split service charge costs according to what the terms of your leases say - sharing...
                21-05-2022, 17:14 PM
              • Reply to Changes to lease wording
                by Lawcruncher
                If the leases are going to be for 999 years there is not a lot of point imposing a restriction in such terms. It is also open to interpretation. You have to decide first if you are going to allow subletting at all. That has to depend on what people want. If any owner already sublets then you cannot...
                21-05-2022, 17:09 PM
              • Changes to lease wording
                by bigalxyz
                In the process of buying freehold for our building. 9 participants (from 11 flats).

                Our solicitor will extend leases to 999 years for an additional fee if we want to. She has asked, as part of that extension process:

                “Are there any amendments that you are seeking to make...
                14-05-2022, 12:27 PM
              • Reply to Levy
                by Macromia
                ...And it still going to depend on what it is for (and on what your lease allows to be charged for, and when.

                Service charge demands have to include details such as a service address for the freeholder, and have to be accompanied by an appropriate copy of 'leaseholders rights and responsibilities',...
                21-05-2022, 16:53 PM
              Working...
              X