First-tier Tribunal Determines Lease Extension Premium
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided on the amount to be paid for extending a lease on a property. The Tribunal determined that the premium should be £31,000 based on the valuation of the property.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a lease extension under the terms of the 1993 Act.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined the premium for a lease extension under the 1993 Act.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined that the premium to be paid for a 90-year lease extension under the terms of the 1993 Act is £31,000. The decision was based on the valuation of the property and the calculations made by the valuer.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
1
Case Reference : LON/00AJ/OCE/2021/0026.
Property : [ADDRESS], HanweIl, Ealing, London W7 IEX
Applicant: [redacted] : Mr [COUNSEL] - [COUNSEL] [NAME]
Respondent: [redacted] : A referral from the County Court of a Determination of premium and terms of acquisition: Section 48 Leasehold Reform, Housing & Urban Development Act 1993
Tribunal Member : Mrs A J Rawlence MRICS
Date of Decision : June 2021 _________________________________________________
DECISION _____________________________________
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2021
The Tribunal determines that the premium to be paid for a 90 year lease extension for the property known as [ADDRESS], HanweIl, Ealing, London W7 IEX (“the Property”) under the terms of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 is £31,000.
Reasons for Decision
Introduction
FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
2
1. On 28 January 2021, Deputy District Judge Le Bas sitting at County Court at Brentford ordered the following:
a. Under section 50(2) of the Leasehold Reform, Housing & Urban Development Act 1993 ("the 1993 Act") the Court dispenses with the requirement for the Claimant to serve a preliminary Notice on the Defendant under section 42 of the 1993 Act.
b. A Vesting Order under section 50(1) of the 1993 Act is made to acquire the new Lease in the form to be approved by the First Tier Tribunal in the Property at [ADDRESS], Hanwell, Ealing, London W7 1 EX in favour of the Claimant, in accordance with the terms of the 1993 Act upon payment into Court of the Appropriate Sum, to be determined by the First Tier Tribunal under section 50(1) of the 1993 Act.
c. A Partner of [NAME] or [NAME] MW be appointed as the Designated Person for the purpose of executing the Deed of Variation.
d. Upon the payment into Court by the Claimant of the Appropriate Sum less the Claimant's costs occasioned by this Claim, the Deed of Variation in the form approved by the First Tier Tribunal shall be executed by the Designated Person and the Designated Person shall deliver the original Deed of Variation of the [NAME].
e. The proceedings shall be stayed to permit the First Tier Tribunal to assess the value of the Appropriate Sum.
2. Directions were issued on 18 February 2021 and, in compliance with those Directions, the Applicant made submissions.
Matters of fact
3. The following items were available to the Tribunal:
a) Valuation Date: 7 April 2020, being the date of the claim to the County Court
b) Start date of lease 25 December 1987
c) Term 99 years
d) Ground Rent: To 24.12.2020
£100.00 per annum From 25.12.2020 to 24.12.2053 £200.00 per annum
3 From 25.12.2053 to 24.12.2086 £300.00 per annum
Proposed Terms for the Lease Extension
4. The Applicant proposed that the new lease be granted on the same terms as the existing least at a peppercorn rent for a term expiring 90 years after the term date of the existing lease. No other modifications or amendments to the new lease were requested other than those that are required by the 1993 Act.
The Law
5. The relevant law is set out in Chapter II sections 39 to 62 and Schedule 13 to the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (“the 1993 Act”).
6. Chapter II of the 1993 Act relates to the individual right of a tenant of a flat to acquire a new lease of that flat. The law is contained in Sections 39 to 61B of the 1993 Act and Part 2 of Schedule 13 deals with the premium payable in respect of the grant of a new lease.
The Applicant’s submissions
7. The Applicant provided a valuation carried out by [NAME] [APPELLANT] [NAME] and dated 8 December 2020. This showed a calculation of the freeholder’s interest at £31,000 as at 7 April 2020.
8. The Applicant purchased the lease on 21 December 2000.
The Tribunal’s Deliberations
9. The Tribunal has made a paper determination as to the terms of the new lease. The Tribunal considered the valuation of the Property and the assumptions and calculations made by [NAME].
10. The Tribunal agrees with the valuation of [ADDRESS], Hanwell, Ealing, London of £31,000.
4
Appeal Provisions
11. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) then a written [NAME] for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case.
12. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the Regional office within 28 days after the Tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the [NAME].
13. If the [NAME] is not made within the 28 day time limit, such [NAME] must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28 day time limit; the Tribunal will then look at such reason(s) and decide whether to allow the [NAME] for permission to appeal to proceed despite not being within the time limit.
14. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates (i.e. give the date, the property and the case number), state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking.
Anthea J Rawlence Chair
5
Appendix 1
Valuation of Flat 7 89/[ADDRESS], West Bridgford, Nottingham
Term
Initial ground rent £10
YP x 56 years 6% 16.03 £160.3
Reversion
Extended lease value £110,000
PV £1 in 56yrs @5% 0.065 £7,150
£7,310 £7,310
Marriage Value
Proposed leaseholder interest £110,000
value of freehold new interest nil £110,000
less
existing leaseholder's interest
£90,000
existing leaseholder interest
£7,310 £97,310
Difference
£12,690
landlord share 50%
£6,345 £6,345
Freehold interest
£13,655
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Lease Extension Premium
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Granted Lease Extension Under 1993 Act
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Granted Lease Extension Under 1993 Act
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Lease Extension Premium
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Lease Extension Premium
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Granted Lease Extension for £13,655 - First-tier Tribunal
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Lease Extension Premiums
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Lease Extension Premiums
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Lease Extension Premium
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Lease Extensions for Eight Flats in First-tier Tribunal Decisio…
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The court accepted the valuation date as 7 April 2020, which was the date the claim was made to the County Court.
- The Tribunal agreed with the valuation of £31,000 for the property.
- The Tribunal determined the premium for the lease extension to be £31,000.
- The new lease was proposed to be granted on the same terms as the existing lease, with a peppercorn rent.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal determined the premium for a 90-year lease extension to be £31,000.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved in the case.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the valuation of the property and the calculations made by the valuer.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Leasehold Reform, Housing & Urban Development Act 1993 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The valuation of the property and the calculations made by the valuer were crucial in determining the premium.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation would need to have their property valued to determine the appropriate premium for a lease extension.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The valuation report and the calculations made by the valuer were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a party may appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) within 28 days.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving lease extensions.
