Monthly Archive for November, 2009

Page 2 of 5

Succession – the afterlife of the tolerated trespasser

By NL on 22/11/2009. 2 Comments

R (Neville) v London Borough of Wandsworth [2009] EWHC 2405 (Admin) [not on Bailii yet]

This was a renewed application for permission for a Judicial Review of Wandsworth’s refusal of a discretionary succession.

Mr Neville had been living with his mother. Mrs Neville had a secure tenancy from Wandsworth from 1999. In April 2004, a suspended possession order was made against Mrs Neville, which stated that she was to give up possession on 12 May 2004, not to be enforced on conditions. Mrs Neville became a tolerated trespasser.

Mrs Neville died in January 2008. In April 2008 Wandsworth wrote to Mr Neville saying that he had no right to succeed … Read the full post

Posted in FLW case note, Housing law - All, secure-tenancy, Succession and Tolerated trespasser.

Tenancy Deposit – Tiensia revisited

By NL on 22/11/2009. 9 Comments

We reported the County Court hearing of Universal Estates v Tiensia in this post. Since then we have heard of developments in this case, with a tantalising hint of a higher court judgment in the offing.

Tiensia at County Court first instance found that late compliance in protecting the deposit and sending the required information was not ‘complying with the initial requirements of the scheme’ (s.213 HA 2004) because the requirements of the scheme itself, Tenancy Deposit Solutions Limited, required this to be done within 14 days of receiving the deposit (and, apparently, also so did s.213).

Now it turns out that Universal Estates appealed, presumably to the Circuit … Read the full post

Posted in Assured Shorthold tenancy, Deposits, FLW case note and Housing law - All. Tags: , .

The track to the old Piggery

By Francis Davey on 20/11/2009. 2 Comments

Thompson v Bee [2009] EWCA Civ 1212 illustrates a neat point of property law and inheritance that could come up in a variety of circumstances but in this concerns an easement.

In Hamsterley stands Pear Tree House on the main village street. Round the side and to the back of the house runs the Track which leads ultimately to a plot of land known to locals as the Garth where there was at one time a piggery and slaughterhouse. Mr and Mrs Bee now live in the House and Mr Thompson owns the Garth. He wishes to build three houses on the Garth and has the planning permission to do … Read the full post

Posted in Housing law - All.

Tenant 1 – 0 Receiver

By J on 20/11/2009. 7 Comments

B v N and others [2009] EWHC 2884 (Admin)

The Criminal Justice Act 1988 makes provision for the confiscation of the proceeds of an offence. In the case of realisable property (such as a residential home), s.80(2) permits the appointment of a receiver, who, in turn, is empowered to recover possession of the property. By s.80(4)

The court may order any person having possession of realisable property to give possession of it to any such receiver.

N had been convicted in December 2003 of conspiracy to launder the proceeds of crime. The realisable assets included a residential property at the heart of this dispute. The property was divided into 12 … Read the full post

Posted in Assured Shorthold tenancy, assured-tenancy, FLW case note, Leasehold and shared ownership, Licences and occupiers and Possession.

Outstanding rent reviews – a cautionary tale

By Francis Davey on 20/11/2009. 0 Comments

Bello v Ideal View [2009] EWHC 2808 (QB) — a case not yet available on bailii — illustrates the dangers with leaving a rent review outstanding.

Mr Bello bought what appear from the transcript to be residential premises at an auction in July 2005. The had been let on a 50 year lease in May 1969 at an annual rent of £60 to be paid quarterly. The terms of sale excluded the seller’s liability for arrears of rent above £60 per annum. Such an exclusion should make any purchaser’s ear’s prick up because it suggests there may be an outstanding rent review and thus an possible additional liability for rent.… Read the full post

Posted in Housing law - All. Tags: , .

Race to the High Court

By J on 20/11/2009. 8 Comments

Arden Chambers have announced (in one of their eflashes. No link yet) that the Supreme Court has given further reasons for the refusal of permission in the Weaver case. The full reasons, which are stated to replace those previously issued are:

Permission to appeal BE REFUSED. The point is clearly one for the Supreme Court but this is not a suitable case on its facts. If a suitable case can be identified consideration should be given to applying for a leap-frog appeal to the Supreme Court.

So – there we are. Permission refused on the basis that it was an academic case. However, surely this just invites a race to … Read the full post

Posted in Housing law - All.

Rumours of gatekeeping

By J on 20/11/2009. 3 Comments

News reaches us here at NL of a decision of the High Court (Birmingham District Registry) by the name of Mehari, Kelly and JI v Birmingham City Council (9 and 10 November 2009) given by Hickenbottom J. Details are sketchy and, as ever, we’d be grateful for any further information.

As we understand it, persons who apply for assistance to BCC are asked to complete a form relating to their reasons for leaving their previous accomodation. Unless BCC are satisfied that the person is at risk of harm in that accomodation, they don’t provide interim accomodation (i.e. they expect the applicant to go back to the previous accomodation).

His … Read the full post

Posted in Housing law - All. Tags: , .
row of sheds footer image
5 pages