Simple RTM Question

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

    Simple RTM Question

    There was a failed RTM application for the block where I have a leasehold Flat.

    How long is the period between withdrawl of the RTM Application and a new Application being made?

    #2
    Premises in relation to which rights previously exercisedE+W.

    5(1)This Chapter does not apply to premises falling within section 72(1) at any time if— .
    (a)the right to manage the premises is at that time exercisable by a RTM company, or .
    (b)that right has been so exercisable but has ceased to be so exercisable less than four years before that time. .
    (2)Sub-paragraph (1)(b) does not apply where the right to manage the premises ceased to be exercisable by virtue of section 73(5) ( where the RTM bought the freehold). .
    (3)A leasehold valuation tribunal may, on an application made by a RTM company, determine that sub-paragraph (1)(b) is not to apply in any case if it considers that it would be unreasonable for it to apply in the circumstances of the case. .
    It therefore depends on what failure and withdrawal means in your post.
    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


      #3
      The failure happened before I bought my flat but from what I have been told is that a commercial company put forward an RTM but failed as the Developer had control of a number of flats and there were not enough qualifying tenants to proceed.

      The RTM went through the initial stages and an application submitted, however the application was withdrawn when the lack of qualifying tenants was discovered.

      Comment


        #4
        Is the developer stilll in control or are they simply now the landlord?

        Was notice of claim issued , as it should not have if the numbers didnt add up, or if their were discussions and the claim scrapped before the NOC was served then there should be no time limits.

        In addition it might be argued that if the flats were unsold then they were not qualifying premises.

        Its hard to say on a simple post of limited information, but why not simply try again and let them argue it?
        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


          #5
          Developer has given head Lease to third party company.

          The numbers didn't add up but the commercial RTM supplier still put the application forward.

          The Freeholder had not sold all flats but was commercially renting out a number of unsold flats.

          All flats are sold now.

          I will dig out the paperwork to give more info but in the mean time I had heard that there was a four year delay before applying again, would this be the max period between applications?

          Comment


            #6
            Wasn't a company that sounded like Artillery was it? The 4 year no return policy depends on at what stage and why the application ended. Thats why I need a bit more if you are all intendeing to start this again.

            Was the application made against the head lessee or the developer freeholder? if it was made to the latter when it should have been the head lessee then the time limt does not apply.

            If you are all resolute in doing this then why not make the application anyway, it won't cost a lot of money betwen you to draw up the notice of claim and let them argue it. They will respond and then you know what they are fighting over, if they even do so.
            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


              #7
              The RTM was against the Head Lease and can be found here
              http://www.residential-property.judi...1_16_15_46.pdf

              Comment


                #8
                The hearing should not have been held as the claim was withdrawn and as the LVT did not have to, and therefore did not rule on costs as theese are due in any event.

                I'd be looking at some cash from the compnay as its a rookie mistake NOT to look at HMLR first and see if leases are granted and if so to whom.

                In this case as in section 1b th eFTT(LVT) can determine the application in less than 4 years if there is a compelling argument.

                If the HL are failing in their obligations the threat of an independent manager under the 87 Act might make them accept RTM instead. I'd take a punt and look to the company that helped you to meet your costs either way win or lose.
                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


                  #9
                  Where the right to manage is terminated, for any reason, no further application for the right may be made for another four years, other than with the consent of a Leasehold Valuation Tribunal.

                  So if your group has a majority support from leaseholders in the block , make an application to the LVT.

                  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
                  • 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 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
                  • 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