Archive for the 'Leasehold and shared ownership' Category

Carpets, covenants and ‘the well-being of lawyers’

By NL on 20/05/2012. 2 Comments

I suspect that many lawyers heave a heavy sigh at neighbour disputes. They seem to be fought with an intensity in inverse proportion to the scale of the problems. Throw in issues in construing lease covenants and enforceability by third parties and it is not surprising that this case ended up in the Court of Appeal, much to the Court’s disapproval.

Faidi & Anor v Elliot Corporation [2012] EWCA Civ 287 concerned two leaseholders in Eaton Mansions. The freeholder is the Grosvenor Estate and the reversioner is Eaton Mansions (Westminster) Ltd (EMW), a company owned by the leaseholders. The Claimant had Flat 6, the Defendant Flat 8, directly above it. … Read the full post

Posted in FLW case note, Housing law - All and Leasehold and shared ownership. Tags: , , .

But that isn’t what it says…

By J on 15/05/2012. 6 Comments

[Edited 16/05/2012 to correct the s.47(2) point]

Beitov Properties Ltd v Elliston Martin [2012] UKUT 133 (LC) is, I suspect, going to cause some sleepless nights for managing agents of long leasehold properties (and, possibly, some other agents and landlords).

Section 47, Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 applies to all demands for rent (whether ground rent or “normal” rent), service charges and administration charges. It requires that all written demands for payment of such sums must “contain… the name and address of the landlord and… if that address is not in England and Wales, an address in England and Wales at which notices… may be served on the landlord by … Read the full post

Posted in FLW case note and Leasehold and shared ownership.

Reasonable houses ad nauseum, ad infinitum

By J on 08/05/2012. 3 Comments

Magnohard Ltd v Cadogan and others [2012] EWCA Civ 594 is yet another case dealing with whether a property can be a “house reasonably so called” and, hence, capable of being enfranchised under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967. There is quite a lot of law on this topic, although the leading case is probably Tandon v Trustees of Spurgeon Homes [1982] AC 755. In essence, if a proerpty can reasonably be considered to be a house, then it is for these purposes (even if it could, equally reasonably) be called something else. Hence properties which look like houses but now have some (possibly substantial) commercial units can be enfranchised. It is … Read the full post

Posted in FLW case note, Housing law - All and Leasehold and shared ownership.

Small, but not unimportant

By J on 31/03/2012. 3 Comments

Marshall Dixon and others v Wellington Close Management Ltd [2012] UKUT 95 (LC) is, so far as I can tell, the first Lands Tribunal/Upper Tribunal case on s.37, Landlord and Tenant Act 1987. As you’ll know, the 1987 Act gives the LVT power to vary residential leases. It can do this if the lease is defective in some way (s.35) or if the requisite majority of leaseholders agree and n0-more than the specified minority object (s.37 – a sort of qualified majority voting basis). The key provision is s.37(5), which provides that, in a building with more than eight leases, an application “shall only be made” if it is not … Read the full post

Posted in Housing law - All, Leasehold and shared ownership and Uncategorized. Tags: , .

What is the difference between a jacuzzi and a sauna?

By NL on 04/03/2012. 4 Comments

 

This may be one of the more esoteric points to be heard by the Court of Appeal on terms of a lease, but one of the issues in Newman v Framewood Manor Management Co Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 159 was whether Mrs Newman was entitled to damages for loss of amenity for not being provided with a contractual jacuzzi but rather a sauna by the Defendant lessor.

While the facts may be of very limited general applicability, there are some general points about loss of amenity claims worth a look. There is also the extraordinary spectacle of an appeal on a claim worth, in the end, about £6,400 in … Read the full post

Posted in Disrepair, FLW case note, Housing law - All and Leasehold and shared ownership. Tags: , , .

Service charges: the GLA speaks

By J on 02/03/2012. 3 Comments

You’ll remember that, back in August 2011, the GLA announced that it was conducting a review of service charges in the capital (see our note here) and that the evidence included a panel discussion which was broadcast across the internet (see here). The final report has now been published (available here) and makes for interesting reading. I’ll come to the recommendations in a moment, but, in outline, the major point seems to be that landlords (especially private sector) would be well-advised to engage in a much more detailed consultation process before doing major works, effectively lifting some of the best practices from the social housing sector. They … Read the full post

Posted in FLW article and Leasehold and shared ownership.

Pay attention at the back

By J on 28/02/2012. 0 Comments

Lawton v 55 Elgin Crescent [2012] UKUT 62 (LC) is one of those cases that you read and think “what on earth was the Tribunal doing?” Luckily, the UT(LC) has stepped in to put the matter right. If only the LVT had paid a bit more attention…

Ms Lawton is the leaseholder of a flat in 55 Elgin Crescent. In or around 2004, she paid certain service charge monies on account of major works, which, on her case, had still not been exhausted as she had still not received value for money in respect of the works done. The landlord disagreed.

First LVT case

Proceedings were issued in the … Read the full post

Posted in FLW case note, Housing law - All and Leasehold and shared ownership.
row of sheds footer image
17 pages