Lease Extension Premium Set by First-tier Tribunal

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AJ/OLR/2025/0725 Property :

145a [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Applicant: [redacted] : [COUNSEL], counsel

Respondents : [redacted] (freeholder) (2) [NAME] [NAME] (absent freeholder) (3) [RESPONDENT] ([NAME]) Representative : N/A Type of [NAME] : Lease extension – Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993. Tribunal members : Judge Tagliavini Mr Ian Holdsworth MSc BSc FRICS Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of hearing Date of decision : 20 October 2025 25 November 2025

DECISION

2

The tribunal’s decisions (1.) The tribunal joins the [NAME] [RESPONDENT] as the

[NAME] respondent pursuant to r.10 of the Tribunal Property (First-tier

Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013. (2.) The tribunal determines the premium payable for the grant of a new

lease is;

(i) £8,000 is payable by the applicant to the freeholders ([NAME]).

(ii) £1,200 is payable by the applicant to the [NAME] respondent

(the [NAME]). (3.) The tribunal approves the terms of the draft lease submitted by the

applicant, subject to the amounts for the payable premium(s) being

amended to accord with tribunal’s decision at paragraph (2) above. (4.) The tribunal remits the matter back to the county court for any decision

on costs. _________________________________________________ The [NAME] 1. This is an [NAME] made pursuant to the Leasehold Reform, Housing

& Urban Development Act 1993 (as amended by the Commonhold and

Leasehold Reform Act 2002) seeking the grant of a new lease. The

[NAME] was issued in the county court and subsequently transferred

from the county court sitting at Bromley for a determination of the

premium payable for an extension of the lease at the subject property

known as 145a [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] (‘the property’).

The background 2. The applicant is the leaseholder of the flat 145a [ADDRESS]

[POSTCODE]. The property is a one bedroom ground floor garden flat located

within a two storey semi-detached house circa 1910 converted into four

flats. The ground floor units have benefit of a section of rear garden.

3 3. In his skeleton argument, Mr [NAME] set out the following

uncontested facts:*

* Page numbers referred to are pages in the digital bundle

submitted by the applicant.

The Applicant is the leasehold owner of a flat at 145a [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] (‘the Property’). The Applicant’s lease

(‘the Lease’) was granted on 16th April 1980 for a term of 125

less 3 days from 1 January 1979. A copy of the lease is at page

87. The leasehold interest created by the lease of the Property is

registered at HM Land Registry with title number NGL373914

(page 84).

The Lease is a sublease granted by [APPELLANT]

(‘[NAME]’), a tenant owned management company. [NAME]

owns a lease granted by the Respondents on 1 February

1980 for a term of 125 years from 1 January 1979 which is

registered at HM Land Registry under title number NGL368807

(page 108). [NAME] therefore has an interest in possession

expectant upon the Lease of only 3 days. [NAME] is aware of t

these proceedings and has stated that it does not wish to

participate in these proceedings and consents to any decision

reached by this Tribunal or by the court (page 132).

The freehold title to the building in which the Property is located

is registered at HM Land Registry under title number

MX438079 (page 119) and is registered in the names of the

Respondents.

The Applicant sought to serve a section 42 notice on the

Respondents and on [NAME] dated 11 December 2023 (page

2). However, while it was possible to trace the First Respondent,

so that he could be served with the section 42 notice, it was not

possible for the Applicant to trace the [NAME] Respondent despite

having instructed an enquiry agent to find him and despite a

notice having been put in the London Gazette (page 37). The

steps taken on behalf of the Applicant to trace the [NAME]

Respondent by the enquiry agent, [RESPONDENT], are set out in

his witness statement (page 45). It has been suggested that the

[NAME] Respondent has died, although it has not been possible to

confirm whether or not this is the case.

Since the [NAME] are collectively the

competent landlord for the purposes of the Leasehold Reform

Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (‘the 1993 Act’), and

since only one of them could be traced, it has not been possible

for the Applicant to find the competent landlord. Accordingly, a

claim was issued by the Applicant in the County Court at

4

Bromley pursuant to the missing landlord provisions of section

50 of the 1993 Act 4. District Judge Watson sitting in the County Court at Bromley on 24

January 2025 made an Order which stated:

1. Pursuant to section 51 of the Leasehold Reform Housing

and Development Act 1993, transfer to First Tier

Tribunal.

2. Costs reserved. 5. Amended Directions were given by the tribunal on 29 July 2025 and a

direction was made that the [RESPONDENT] (who was not joined to the County Court Claim) be notified of

this [NAME]. The tribunal’s Amended Directions stated:

The terms of the new lease/transfer must be approved by the

County Court in the absence of the [NAME] respondent ([NAME])

and the [NAME] from the County Court claim. The

tribunal will determine only the premium payable for the grant

of a new lease and refer the matter back to the County Court for

all/any further Orders. 6. However, for completeness and in order to avoid any potential

complexities on the matter being remitted to the County Court, the

tribunal considers it appropriate to join [RESPONDENT] as a [NAME]

respondent pursuant to r.10 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier

Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013. 7. Further, On hearing submissions from Mr [NAME] at the hearing, as

to the tribunal’s sole jurisdiction to determine the terms of the new lease

and in the absence of any objection by the first respondent, the tribunal

exercises its powers pursuant to r.6 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier

Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013 and amends this direction as

indicated in red below.

The terms of the new lease/transfer must be approved by the

and the [NAME] from the County Court claim. The

of a new lease and the terms of the new lease and then refer the

matter back to the County Court for all/any further Orders.

5 The hearing 8. At the video hearing, the tribunal was provided with a digital bundle

comprising 143 pages by the applicant, who was represented by Mr

[COUNSEL] of counsel. The first respondent joined the video hearing at

10.29 a.m. due to having earlier experienced connection difficulties.

None of the respondents had provided any alternative valuation or

written submissions. Mr [NAME] confirmed to the tribunal he did not

oppose the valuation of the premium payable put forward by the

applicant’s valuer, Mr [APPELLANT] (Hons) MTPI, [NAME] and

RICS registered valuer or oppose the terms of the draft lease put

forward by the applicant. 9. The [NAME] respondent did not appear and was not represented and the

tribunal was satisfied, that despite the applicant’s best efforts the [NAME]

respondent could not be found. The tribunal was also satisfied [COMPANY] had been notified of the [NAME] and of the hearing date.

The [NAME] respondent subsequently notified the parties and the tribunal

by letter dated 15 October 2025, that it did not intend to appear at the

hearing or make any submissions in view of the fact it had a reversion

of only 3 days which was of limited value. The tribunal’s reasons 10. The tribunal read and heard the expert valuation evidence of Mr [NAME],

who spoke to his report and answered the tribunal’s questions about his

methodology and the comparables used in his valuation. The tribunal

also had regard to the agreement by the first respondent to Mr [RESPONDENT]

valuation and the terms of the draft lease (subject to the insertion of

the correct premium payable), the tribunal was satisfied the approach to

the valuation was reasonable and in accordance with the relevant

legislation. Therefore, the tribunal accepts and adopts Mr [NAME]

valuation report and valuation (attached to this decision). Therefore, the

tribunal confirms the premium payable by the applicant is:

(i) £8,000 to the freeholders ([NAME]).

(ii) £1,200 is payable to the [NAME] respondent (the [NAME]). 11. Further to the amendment to the directions above, the tribunal confirms

the uncontested terms of the draft lease, subject to any required

amendment to reflect the correct premium payable to the freeholders

and to the [NAME] as set out in paragraph 10 above.

6 Name: Judge Tagliavini Date: 25 November 2025

Valuation attached

Rights of appeal

By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013, the Tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may 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] should be made on Form RP PTA available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-rp-pta-[NAME]-for- permission-to-appeal-a-decision-to-the-upper-tribunal-lands-chamber 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 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. 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).

7