Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About iwbsheff

  • Rank
    Registered User

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Jeffrey, my apologies for being a bit facetious. I know you do some sterling work in this area and of course hit the nail on the head re the costs of enforcement. I did raise it with my MP once and their response was very much "you're on the right side of the law so ignore them". They failed to see the bigger issue of the anxiety caused and a local company (in my opinion) operating on the bounds of acceptability (I'm trying not be be libellous here).
  2. "But Coppen does not comply with either provision." ...and nobody cares!
  3. "Stone ....and ...solid brick ...eg 9” brickwork " I thought it was stone faced (and I guess the actual wall is...at least I hope it is!) but when we had the plaster off inside the base of the bay window turned out to be solid stone blocks. Don't see what difference it makes though. What's your point?
  4. I read this https://www.heritage-house.org/damp-and-condensation/types-of-damp-what-have-i-got/damp-problems-caused-by-cement-pointing-of-brick-or-stone.html when I was re pointing the base of our bay window which is stone (victorian stone front terrace not far from Walkley in Crookesmoor). Perhaps I was taken for a ride but I bought some 'heritage' lime mortar given it was only a small area.
  5. Yellow tubing is for the gas work going on down Harcourt Road/Crookes Valley surely?
  6. Cynically, perhaps after securing a three year license they didn't feel the need to impress the council with their concern for local residents this year? Or less cynically, perhaps they didn't feel the need to repeat themselves, if measures that worked last year are in place for this year. Does seem a little disrespectful.
  7. db6279 1. Yes, as I understand it the 'relevant date' is the renewal date. 2. Yes, the notice frees you from any covenant in your lease allowing them to direct your insurer. 3. Probably more than the consent fee. As cyclone says, use the template (same one here as a pdf perhaps a bit easier to copy and paste http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/3097/pdfs/uksi_20043097_en.pdf). I'm not sure if "it isn't easy for a lay person to get a notice correct" but Compton will probably try to tell you that some small procedural error makes it invalid...don't listen to them. Send it recorded post. 4. Unless your lease sets something specific out then no fees are due. Issue the notice and do not pay any spurious 'admin' fees. They cannot compel you to insure with their preferred insurer provided you exercise your rights under Section 164 correctly (point 2 + 3). As for forfeiting the lease, I'd be surprised but it'll depend on how the lease is written. If it's getting to that point. you'd probably you need qualified legal advice. https://www.lease-advice.org/ provide free advice. Read back over the Coppen threads on this forum, Jeffrey Shaw has set the process out several times (this is where I discovered it). Caveat: THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE, just my own experience of using Section 164. if in doubt seek qualified opinion.
  8. From what I understand the process is current owner issues the 'notice of claim' (i.e. intention to buy the freehold reversion) then transfers it to you as a 'benefit of the sale'. You can then go through the process of buying the reversion as if you'd already lived there for 2 years. I'm sure its mentioned on other Coppen threads if you have a look - in theory straightforward but as Cyclone says it may delay proceedings. You've got to have a solicitor (and vendor's solicitor too!) who knows their stuff leasehold-wise which isn't a given in my experience. Jeffrey Shaw is your man for on the forums. I found him through here and used him to purchase our freehold reversion. Wouldn't hesitate to recommend. Costs will be specific to your case but the general rule of thumb is 20-25 times your ground rent for the reversion itself then your and Coppen's (reasonable) legal and surveying costs. Mileage will vary based on the complexity of the lease, how long negotiations go on and so on. Not much point in me guessing. One advantage of the two year thing is you can save up. As for "We are informed by the vendor that he has not received any bills for the ground rent in the time he has owned it. " Must say this is rather un-Coppen like behaviour....
  9. " He told me their procedure was to continue billing for the insurance charge despite receiving the notice, and when they property comes up for sale they look to check the validity of the notices" and then try to convince your buyer that there's some kind of outstanding charge to pay and generally hold up the sale to the aggravation of all involved?
  10. That's a shame, I sorry that it's not very helpful just to hear "just buy it" if you can't afford it right now. I did manage to get Coppen to take the insurance charge off my invoice in the end with a few well worded letters. Happy to share the details by PM if it's helpful. Don't give in to them!
  11. As I understand it (admittedly it's not that easy to read). the notice of cover (under section 164) which releases you of any obligation to use the landlords insurer should be issued within 14 days of that cover being arranged or renewed (in May). https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/15/section/164 So remember to issue the notice of cover when your insurance is due to renew and tell Coppen no charge is due. Remind them you already provided notice (reading your previous posts) for last year. Then remind them again if any further invoices arrive threaten them with court action. Read your lease carefully too - if there's no covenant in there for the landlord to direct insurance, write to Coppen telling them so. They just assume the covenant is there. Tell them again if necessary - it only costs you a stamp after all - and threaten court action for their harassment . Remind them you have the right to quiet enjoyment of your home. But...I did buy my freehold in the end. We calculated that not having to deal with Coppen when/if we come to sell was worth the money.
  12. In one of my letters to Coppen I said I regarded their charges as fraudulent given the content of my lease but with admittedly no idea of the legal basis. Presumably you could pursue them legally but would you be awarded costs? I wrote to my MP about their antics but he didn't seem very interested in the general issue.
  13. Presumably that's also the period your ground rent covers? As I think Jeffrey will attest this is all part of Coppen's notices not complying with the letter of the law. I think (disclaimer: this is not legal advice but my remembering of discussions with Jeffrey et al) they're not actually allowed to ask for ground rent in advance, but they do to meet their schedules. We used to get billed for October in March (i.e. financial year end). You could write back and say, under s.166 of the Commonhold and Leasehold act, please bill me for ground rent correctly when that ground rent is due. "The date for payment of the ground rent given in the notice cannot be earlier than 30 days from the date notice is given, nor more than 60 days after that date. Overriding this is the provision that the date for payment cannot be earlier than the date set out in the lease itself." https://www.lease-advice.org/article/ground-rent-a-demanding-notice/
  14. I'd word the covering letter quite strongly. Make it clear that this is unacceptable behaviour and that you know your rights as the leaseholder. No fees for insurance due as long as 1) That there is no "freeholder can direct insurance" covenant in your lease (apologies if you mentioned this upthread) or 2) If there is you're absolutely sure you've complied with s.164 to the letter. If you want to be more mischievous, someone else said that they put a counter invoice, with a letter charge of £45 every time they wrote. This was on the same legal footing - i.e. none - as Coppen. Although, again, points above apply, you have to be quite sure of your position.
  15. I think I posted upthread, or on another Coppen thread - I sent them a strongly worded letter threatening court action if they continued to send erroneous invoices and I saw this as a breach of my right to quiet enjoyment of my home. This was harassment and I would seek damages due to the stress caused etc. It was something of an idle threat - I mean, it would cost vastly more to engage legally with them and there's always the chance the court won't award costs. But it did the trick. Perhaps because I sounded like I knew what I was talking about and had actually read my lease? But...I ended up buying the freehold reversion anyway. I didn't want potential buyers in the future getting spooked by their antics. As geared put it, sack them off if you can.
  • 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.