Jump to content

Jeffrey Shaw

Moderators
  • Content Count

    14,194
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jeffrey Shaw

  • Rank
    Mr
  • Birthday 03/09/1954

Personal Information

  • Location
    Sheffield
  • Occupation
    Solicitor

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Several clients of mine have leaseholds on which G&O owns the freehold reversion as landlord. The best advice is that you can avoid problems by purchasing: a. the house's f/r (if you have owned its leasehold for at least two years); or b. the block's f/r (if what you own is a leasehold flat- no 'two year' rule in this case) and you team-up with at least half of the block's leaseholders.
  2. 1. A reasonable purchase price might be 25-30 times the ground rent (= £300-360). However, Coppen won't accept that low a figure. 2. You'd also have to pay Coppen's conveyancing fees. 3. The two elements together might come to about £650, were Coppen to see sense. 4. As to the purchase fees: a. diagnostic work up to & inc. serving Notice of Claim- c. £300-350; b. negotiations- depends on time taken; and c. substantive work, once terms are agreed, up to completion and registration: c. £300-350.
  3. If you OWN a leasehold, you've already bought the lease! What you mean is "If you've lived in a leasehold property for a long time [=at least two years], you are entitled to buy the freehold reversion and any other intervening reversion (if it's a house) or to extend the lease by 90 yrs. (if it's a flat)."
  4. You're mostly correct, BUT: a. the vendor can demand an indemnity covenant if the freehold is already subject to covenants; and b. the vendor might seek to add new freehold covenants. These should be resisted unless the vendor owns any undeveloped land adjacent and wants the covenants in order o protect its value. See s.10(3)-(5) of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/88/section/10
  5. HOUSES: there's no real reason why a new house should not be sold freehold, as long as the developer owns the freehold. FLATS: leaseholds are essential to ensure that positive covenants (e.g paying service charge etc.) stay fully enforceable. JosephD: the petition is not dealing with short-term lettings (= no purchase price/premium; market rent payable). It's aimed at 'ownership' status (= market value purchase price/premium; minimal rent payable).
  6. Your friend might count himself fortunate not to have been prosecuted! Receiving rent funded by a criminal offence is capable of itself being a criminal offence.
  7. Yes. Any problems ought to have been revealed by: a. the vendor's replies to the usual TA6 questionnaire/information form; b. the Local Authority's result of the standard LLC1 search form; or c. the Local Authority's replies to the standard CON29R Local Authority Enquiries form. Sometimes, esp. where replies are uncertain/inadequate, the solicitor might also have obtained an Indemnity Insuranmce policy. In any case, as JamesR123 advises, re-check what your solicitor did when acting on your purchase.
  8. Yes. Example: a sale from one friend to another, not advertised to the public, does not need an EPC. A mortgagee [lender] will take no account of whether an EPC has been obtained.
  9. Any letting under Part 1 of the 1988 Act is an 'assured tenancy'. Here's the first bit of it: Meaning of assured tenancy etc. 1 Assured tenancies. (1) A tenancy under which a dwelling-house is let as a separate dwelling is for the purposes of this Act an assured tenancy if and so long as— (a)the tenant or, as the case may be, each of the joint tenants is an individual; and (b)the tenant or, as the case may be, at least one of the joint tenants occupies the dwelling-house as his only or principal home; and (c)the tenancy is not one which, by virtue of subsection (2) or subsection (6) below, cannot be an assured tenancy. (1A) Subsection (1) has effect subject to section 15A (loss of assured tenancy status). (2) Subject to subsection (3) below, if and so long as a tenancy falls within any paragraph in Part I of Schedule 1 to this Act, it cannot be an assured tenancy; and in that Schedule— (a) “tenancy” means a tenancy under which a dwelling-house is let as a separate dwelling; (b) Part II has effect for determining the rateable value of a dwelling-house for the purposes of Part I; and (c) Part III has effect for supplementing paragraph 10 in Part I. (2A)The Secretary of State may by order replace any amount referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3A of Schedule 1 to this Act by such amount as is specified in the order; and such an order shall be made by statutory instrument which shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament... But, as previously posted, some are ASTs and some aren't. The s.21 procedure applies only to ASTs.
  10. T is still liable for rent, whether or not residing, until the letting ends. As explained, a s.21 Notice does not end it- and nor does merely vacating (although no further continuation tenancies can arise once T is not resident- see s.1(1) extract below, again with my underlining). (1) A tenancy under which a dwelling-house is let as a separate dwelling is for the purposes of this Act an assured tenancy if and so long as— (a) the tenant or, as the case may be, each of the joint tenants is an individual; and (b) the tenant or, as the case may be, at least one of the joint tenants occupies the dwelling-house as his only or principal home; and (c) the tenancy is not one which, by virtue of subsection (2) or subsection (6) below, cannot be an assured tenancy.
  11. Only if: a. the vendor has already established this; or b. you contact the landlord/reversioner to establish it- you might be told that it's none of your business, however. and that of course would be true at law for the time being. ALSO: you cannot make the vendor assign its rights unless the Auction Special Conditions oblige it to do so.
  12. The so-called petition is pointless. Leasehold is essential to enable covenant enforceability. What needs much more enforcement is the conduct of certain freehold reversioners. There is no cost-effective way for a leaseholder to control misconduct.
  13. 1. Have you verified the position at HMLR? Look at the freehold title for £3 via https://eservices.landregistry.gov.uk/eservices/FindAProperty/view/QuickEnquiryInit.do 2. Even if the freehold reversion is unregistered or if its registered proprietor is missing, I'd strongly recommend collective enfranchisement (RTE). See http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1993/28/part/I/chapter/I and particularly s.26 [Where L cannot be found]. 3.Alternatively, consider Right To Mange (RTM). See http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/15/part/2/chapter/1 and particularly s.85 [Where L cannot be found]
  14. 1. As others have posted, dump your solicitor if he/she cannot cope with leasehold conveyancing. 2. At the very least, and like you suggest, make your leasehold vendor serve a Notice of Claim- before completing the leasehold sale to you- and assign its benefit to you on completion. This will enable you to extract Coppen's freehold reversion without waiting a further two years. 3. If the extension was prior to Coppen's acquiring the freehold reversion, did the then leaseholder obtain consent from Coppen's predecessor? Any such consent would bind Coppen. Even if there was no such consent, a clear ground rent receipt that post-dates the extension would rule-out any enforcement action: s.45(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925. Similarly, one-off breach of a 'consent' covenant becomes unenforceable after twelve years: Limitation Act 1980.
  15. True, although the cost of any repairs needed because of a specific tenant's acts or omissions might fall on that tenant- not on the service charge payable by all.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.