User Profile

[Lawcruncher]

Your can play the estoppel by agreement card. Estoppel by agreement applies If (a) a question arises and to answer it the parties make certain assumptions and (b) later another question arises and one party wants to deny that the assumptions apply. In that case the law says that the assumptions must...

[Lawcruncher]

I do not think that that works. A cheque involves an unconditional order to pay and is treated as if it is cash. If you accept a cheque you are deemed to have been paid the amount ordered to be paid subject only to the cheque being cleared. If the cheque bounces there is a rewind and you are deemed...

[Lawcruncher]

To be honest I am not sure what you need to say, if anything. I think the main thing is to send the cheque back. I suggest posting your query here where litigators hang out: http://swarblaw.co.uk/viewforum.php?f=7

I am not sure you really need to be worrying too much about waiving the right...

[Lawcruncher]

For the purposes of this thread, receipt of a cheque is the same thing as receiving cash. If someone pays by cheque the date of payment cannot be the date when the recipient decides to bank the cheque or the cheque is cleared. Send back the cheque.

[Lawcruncher]

All noted. What rights are reserved?

[Lawcruncher]

"Early autumn is the perfect time to sow a new lawn while the soil is warm and damp."

So say the BBC so it must be right....

[Lawcruncher]

If you read this thread: https://forums.landlordzone.co.uk/fo...-in-the-lease= you will see I refer to section 62 of the Law of Property Act 1925. In many cases section 62(2)...

[Lawcruncher]

Agreed. Of course a hob will be part of the property if it is a fixture.



As you suggest, cosmetic damage does not affect the utility of an item and that is really what is important. It is just that damage always seems worse when the item is new. The first scratch on a new...

[Lawcruncher]

Lawcruncher!

This is just a rule of thumb. It does though have a source: section 18 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927. The section is a special case of the general rule that damages cannot exceed your loss. If there is no difference between the rent obtainable if the repairs were made...

[Lawcruncher]

A rough guide to whether any compensation should be minimal is to ask if the damage is such that a reasonable owner-occupier would rush to repair it or a reasonable prospective tenant would be put off taking the property. If the answer is "no" then the compensation should be minimal.

[Lawcruncher]

A new tenancy may mean that any deposit needs reprotecting.

[Lawcruncher]

According to Megarry & Wade no notice is required - see post 10.

[Lawcruncher]

Self-help is tricky. A practical problem is that if the police get involved they have a tendency to arrest the wrong person.

As to the law I quote from Megarry & Wade:

"Provided that no more force is used than reasonably necessary, that there is no injury to innocent...

[Lawcruncher]

Actually, no. There is a presumption that on a sale off where the seller retains land immediately adjoining any flank wall that the wall is included. I suspect that in your case the flank wall is mentioned by way of confirmation as there is also a reference to a retaining wall where there is no such...

[Lawcruncher]

No. It means that before the land (that is your land) was registered there was a sale and that the sale document (the conveyance referred to) (a) expressly included the retaining and flank walls on the north and (b) contained a declaration that the walls and fence on the south side are a party wall...

[Lawcruncher]

You will get more advice on roots than you probably want here: https://www.gardenlaw.co.uk/phpBB2/v...80640f405013b0

[Lawcruncher]

Either you have a right to access the cupboard or you do not. Whether you owe money does not come into it - unless, as indicated above, the lease makes the exercise of rights conditional on paying the service charge which would, in my experience, be unusual. Even if that is the case, I would suggest...

[Lawcruncher]

The only possible decision. Do not buy into a problem...

[Lawcruncher]

It is not so much that you have the right to extend onto the land, but that the landlord cannot refuse permission if it is unreasonable to do so.

The short answer to your question is "no". The legislation says that where consent is required it is not to be unreasonably withheld....

[Lawcruncher]

And if there is an absolute prohibition against making alterations.

A lease can (and some indeed do) have both absolute and qualified prohibitions against making alterations e.g. an absolute prohibiton against making structural and external alterations and a qualified prohibition against...