First-tier Tribunal Sets Price for Freehold Acquisition When Landlord Missing
📌 In brief
In this case, the First-tier Tribunal determined the price for leaseholders to acquire the freehold interest in a property where the landlord could not be found. The Tribunal followed Section 27 of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 to assess the value of the property and set the price at £1,185.
⚖️ Legal holding
A leaseholder is entitled to acquire the freehold interest in a property where the landlord cannot be found, subject to the determination of the price by the First-tier Tribunal.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined the price of the freehold interest in a property where the landlord could not be located.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined the price of the freehold interest in a property where the landlord could not be found, applying Section 27 of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967. The leaseholders sought to acquire the freehold interest but were unable to locate the landlord. The Tribunal assessed the value of the property and determined the price to be £1,185.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
Case Reference : BIR/00CR/OAF/2021/0015
Property
: 17 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Applicants
: [redacted]
Representative
: [NAME], Solicitors
Respondent: [redacted]
Representative
: None
Type of Application : To determine the sum payable into Court by lessees to [APPELLANT]
a freehold interest pursuant to Section 27 Leasehold Reform Act
1967 by Order of Birmingham County Court, 18th July 2019.
Claim No: B00BM569
Tribunal Members : [NAME] B.Sc.(Est.Man.) [NAME]
Judge M.K. Gandham
Date and Venue of : None. Determined by paper submission Hearing
Date of Decision : 31/01/2022
____________________________________________________________
DECISION
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2022
FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
Introduction 1 This is an application to determine the sum payable into Court by Lessees to [APPELLANT] the
freehold interest in 17 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE], where the landlord cannot be found, pursuant to Section 27 Leasehold Reform Act 1967 ('the Act').
2 The Lessees have been unable to locate the freeholder to serve Notice to acquire the freehold and applied to Birmingham County Court for a Vesting Order on 6th March 2015. This was granted on 18th July 2019 by District Judge Ingram, subject to assessment of the price as at 6th March 2015 by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber).
The Law 3 There are two known interests in the property:
Freehold Owned by parties unknown. The lease had been granted by [RESPONDENT] and [NAME] to [RESPONDENT] for 380 years from 26th April 1712 at a peppercorn
ground rent.
Leasehold The leasehold interest was assigned to the Applicants in 2006.
4 The Applicants are the current leaseholders in occupation and wish to acquire the freehold. They have been unable to locate the present freeholders and applied to Birmingham County Court for a Vesting Order under Section 27 of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967. The application was made on 6th March 2015, which is the valuation date for present purposes.
[ADDRESS] issued the Order on 18th July 2019, subject to determination of the price by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber).
6 The Tribunal has considered the facts and assesses the price under section 9(1) of the Act.
Facts Found 7 The Tribunal inspected the property on 24th January 2022. It comprises a detached bungalow on an estate built around 1988. The accommodation comprises an entrance hall, living room, kitchen breakfast room, two double bedrooms and bathroom. It has a terraced front garden with lawn and drive to the side and attached single garage. The back garden has a patio, lawn and fencing to all sides.
8 It is of brick and tile construction and in good condition throughout.
9 The plot is relatively small but average for the estate. There is a small extension to the rear to create a breakfast room as part of the kitchen but there are no practical ways of building further extensions and the plot is considered fully developed.
Issues [ADDRESS] requires the Tribunal to determine the price of the freehold interest and any outstanding ground rent.
The price payable under section 9(1) of the Act 11 The Applicants submitted a valuation prepared by a [NAME] acting on their behalf, [NAME].[NAME] [NAME] of [NAME], Birmingham, and the Tribunal's determination of each item of the valuation is set out below.
12 Unexpired Term
Applicant
Approximately 77 years two months.
Tribunal
The Tribunal accepts the term from the Land Registry entry and agrees the unexpired term at the valuation date but for calculation purposes, rounds to 77 years.
13 Value of Term Ground Rent
Applicant
Nil, peppercorn ground rent.
Tribunal
The Tribunal agrees.
14 Freehold Entirety Value
Applicant
The Applicants bought the lease in 2006 and the price paid at the time is of no assistance.
Mr [NAME] values the freehold at March 2015 at £190,000 having checked the sales records of the seven most recent sales in [ADDRESS] from 2000 to 2012, all of which are discounted as historic, and taking account of sales of similar bungalows in the area:
[ADDRESS] 2015 £175,000
[ADDRESS] 2015 £215,000
[ADDRESS] 2014 £200,000
Tribunal
The Tribunal inspected the exteriors of the three comparables, all of which are modern bungalows within a quarter of a mile of [ADDRESS].
The bungalow in [ADDRESS] appears similar but according to evidence published by [NAME], has not been extended. On this basis, the value of the subject should be marginally higher.
The bungalows in [ADDRESS] appear better from the road frontage, the front gardens are deeper, the plots wider and there is more space between them. The Tribunal considers they would sell for more than [ADDRESS] if offered for sale.
The Act requires the price to be based on the rental value of the plot and the most usual way of assessing this is to calculate the maximum sale price of a notional house on the plot, which would not necessarily but may be the existing house if the plot is fully developed, and apply a percentage to assess the value of the plot relative to the whole. The Valuer then applies a notional rate of return to the plot value to assess its notional rental value for the purposes of section 15 of the Act.
The full potential value of the house or in this case bungalow is referred to as the 'entirety value', and the value of the existing house or bungalow, assuming freehold with vacant possession, is the 'standing house value'. The notional plot rental value or ground rent referred to in section 15 of the Act is generally known as the 'modern ground rent'.
Having considered the sales evidence of similar properties in the area the Tribunal agrees with Mr [NAME] and considers the entirety value to be £190,000, i.e. the maximum potential value of a fully developed bungalow on this plot in March 2015.
15 Site Value as Percentage of Entirety Value
Applicant
34% as the plot slopes up from the road.
Tribunal
The Tribunal agrees.
16 [APPELLANT]
Applicant
As there is a peppercorn ground rent the value of the term income is effectively nil and there would be no point determining the capitalisation rate.
Mr [NAME] submits for a deferment rate of 5.5% based on case law (e.g. see footnote below)
and personal experience of negotiating numerous cases with other Valuers.
Tribunal
The Tribunal agrees.
Cases cited:
1 [NAME] v [NAME] of the Calthorpe Estates [2009] UKUT 235 (LC)
2 Mansal Securities and Others [2009] [NAME]/185/2007
3 [COMPANY] [2012] UKUT 4 (LC), [2012] 1 EGLR 83
17 Freehold Standing House Value
Applicant
£190,000. Mr [APPELLANT] considers the plot fully developed and accordingly deems the standing house value to be the same as the entirety value.
Tribunal
The 'standing house' value is the market value of the bungalow currently built on the site, excluding the value of tenant improvements, assuming the freehold is sold with vacant possession.
The Tribunal agrees that in this case the entirety value and standing house value are the same, £190,000.
18 'Clarise reduction'
Applicant
Mr [APPELLANT] makes a 5% reduction in the standing house value to reflect the principle in [NAME] of the prospect of a lessee remaining in occupation at lease expiry under Schedule 10 to the Local Government and Housing Act 1989.
Tribunal
As the lease will not expire for 77 years, the Tribunal considers this too remote to require a Clarise reduction. Each case is considered on its merits but in this instance it is too far in the future and disallowed.
19 Tribunal Valuation
Based on these inputs, the Tribunal determines the value of the freehold interest as:
Term 1
£ 0
Term 2
Entirety Value
£190,000
x plot ratio
0.34
Plot Value
£ 64,600
5.5% return
0.055
Equivalent rental value per s.15 of the Act
£ 3,553
[APPELLANT] 50 years 5.5%
16.9315
Present Value 77 years 5.5%
0.0162017
£ 974
Reversion
Standing House Value
£ 190,000
Present Value 127 years 5.5%
0.001114
£ 211
Freehold Value
£ 1,185
20 Arrears of Ground Rent
The property is subject to a peppercorn ground rent according to Land Registry. The Tribunal therefore determines the outstanding ground rent at nil in accordance with the Court Order of 18th July 2019.
21 Tribunal Determination
The Tribunal determines the price of the freehold interest at £1,185 (One Thousand One Hundred and Eighty Five Pounds).
[NAME] B.Sc.(Est.Man.) [NAME] 31/01/2022
Appeal to the Upper Tribunal
Any appeal against this decision must be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber). Prior to making such an appeal the party appealing must apply, in writing, to this Tribunal for permission to appeal within 28 days of the date of issue of this decision (or, if applicable, within 28 days of any decision on a review or application to set aside) identifying the decision to which the appeal relates, stating the grounds on which that party intends to rely in the appeal and the result sought by the party making the application.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Freehold Interest Value at Nil Pounds
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Leaseholders Ruled Liable for Service Charges Despite Financial Hardship
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Entitled to Freehold Interest Under Leasehold Reform Act
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent at £700 for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Improvement Notice and Demand for Payment Quashed Due to Defects
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Allows Bypass of Consultation Requirements for Asbestos…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Quashes Improvement Notice Due to Insufficient Evidence
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Rent Repayment Order for Unlicensed Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Mobile Home Occupier Allowed to Park Two Vehicles
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Successful in Breach of Lease Case Against Landlord
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenants Win Property Management Case, Appointed Independent Manager
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 claimant demonstrates that the landlord cannot be found.
- The claimant seeks to acquire the freehold interest in their property.
- The claimant relies on the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 for their entitlement.
- The claimant requests the First-tier Tribunal to determine the price.
- The claimant shows that the local housing authority must provide sufficient evidence.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- No significant factors identified in the provided cases that went against the claimant.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal set the price for leaseholders to acquire the freehold interest in a property where the landlord could not be found.
Who was involved?
Leaseholders seeking to acquire the freehold interest and a missing landlord.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the value of the property and the provisions of Section 27 of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Section 27 of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument centered on the value of the property and the applicability of Section 27 of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the leaseholders.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation can seek to acquire the freehold interest if they follow the procedures outlined in Section 27 of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The valuation of the property and the inability to locate the landlord were crucial.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, any appeal must be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
Yes, it is recommended to get legal advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.
