Freehold Purchase Approved: Premium Set at £12,200
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal approved the purchase of the freehold by the tenants. They set the price at £12,200 based on a valuation report.
⚖️ Legal holding
Tenants are entitled to purchase the freehold of their property under the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal approved the valuation report for the purchase of the freehold and set the premium at £12,200.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal approved the valuation report submitted by the tenants and set the premium for the purchase of the freehold at £12,200 under the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2013
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00AJ/OCE/020/0003 Property : 97 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] [COUNSEL] (3) [COUNSEL] : [COUNSEL] [RESPONDENT] Respondent : [redacted] : N/A Type of [NAME] : Enfranchisement – missing landlord Tribunal Members : Judge Tagliavini Miss M Krisko FRICS Date and venue of hearing (paper) : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] 18 February 2020 Date of Decision : 18 February 2020
DECISION
2 THE TRIBUNALS’S SUMMARY
DECISION I. The premium payable for the purchase of the freehold of the property situate at 97 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] is £12,200.
2. The tribunal approves the terms of the conveyance in the form of the TR1 provided subject to the insertion of the premium payable. _________________________________________________ The [NAME]
1. This matter has been transferred to the tribunal from the county court sitting at Brentford by an order of [NAME] dated 22 October 2019 for the determination of the premium payable for the freehold of the subject property and the approval of the terms of transfer under the provisions of the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993. The premises 2. The premises comprise two flats on the ground and first floors of a converted Victorian terraced house. The first and the second applicants acquired an interest on 29 May 2015 in the ground floor flat under a lease dated 11 February 1983 granting a term of 125 years from 29 September 1982 at a ground rent of £50 per annum and thereafter £100 per annum for the second period of 50 years and £150 per annum for the remainder of the term. The [NAME] applicant acquired an interest in the first floor flat on 31 July 1986 under a lease dated 23 December 1982 granting a term of 125 years from 29 September 1982 at a ground rent of £50 per annum rising to £100 for the second fifty year period and £150 per annum for the remainder of the term.
3. Therefore, both leases have 88.37 years remaining as at the valuation date of 15 May 2019.
4. On 22 October 2019 an order was made by [NAME] vesting the right to purchase the freehold of the subject premises in the applicants subject to the determination of the terms of the conveyance and the premium to be determined by this tribunal. The applicant’s evidence 5. In support of this [NAME] the applicants relied upon the valuation report of [NAME] dated 4 February 2020. The tribunal
3 considered that Mr. [NAME] approach to the valuation of the freehold was appropriate in respect of the ground rent, the years used are correct in accordance with the lease and the yield used of 7% is within the usual parameters of a ground rent of this level payable half yearly in advance. As both leases had over 80 years remaining there was no marriage value payable.
6. The two flats were similar in size although the ground floor flat has the benefit of the sole use of the rear (patio) garden.
7. Mr. [NAME] referred in his valuation to a number of appropriately located comparable properties in the vicinity of the subject property and provided a plan showing the location of these comparables to the subject property. Mr. [NAME] relied upon the key comparable at [ADDRESS] which sold for £350,000 on 9 November 2018. Mr. [NAME] used the Land Registry House Price Index for flats and maisonettes in the London Brough of Ealing to obtain a time adjustment. The other comparables relied upon showed a similar trend in values.
8. Using these comparable properties Mr. [NAME] arrived at the unimproved values of the ground and first floor flats in the subject property at £330,000 and £324,000 respectively. Thereafter, by applying a reversionary yield of 5% in accordance with [NAME] he arrived at £5,400 and £5,300 for the ground and first floor flats respectively as the premiums payable. Mr. [NAME] made an addition of nominal sum of £1,500 in respect of the potential storage space in the roof.
9. In conclusion, Mr. [NAME] calculated that the premium payable for the freehold of the subject property is £12,200.
10. The tribunal approves the terms of the conveyance in the form of the TR1 provided subject to the insertion of the premium payable.
Name: Judge Tagliavini
Dated: 18 February 2020
4
Rights of Appeal
By rule 36(2) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal( ( Property Chamber) Rules 2013, the tribunal is required to notify he parties about any right of appeal they might have.
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.
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].
If the [NAME] is not made within the 28 day time , such [NAME] must include a request for an extension of time and the reasons 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 these time limits.
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.
If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further [NAME] for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 11 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Extends Property Manager's Term for Three Years
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy Adjusted by First-tier Tribunal
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Urgent Repairs Dispensation Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Drainage Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Unconditional Dispensation for Service Charge Ag…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Repairs Due to Water Ingress
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 tribunal accepted the applicant's valuation approach for the freehold, including the ground rent and the 7% yield.
- The valuation correctly identified that no marriage value was payable because both leases had over 80 years remaining.
- The valuation used appropriately located comparable properties and applied a time adjustment using the Land Registry House Price Index.
- The valuation included an additional nominal sum for potential storage space in the roof.
- The tribunal approved the terms of the conveyance in the provided TR1 form, subject to the insertion of the premium.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
It decided that the premium for purchasing the freehold should be £12,200.
Who was involved?
Tenants and the landlord were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court approved the valuation report because it found the approach and calculations appropriate.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The valuation report's calculation of the freehold's value was crucial.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenants.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation can also seek to purchase the freehold of their property.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The valuation report and the leases were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to get advice from a qualified solicitor for a case like this.
