Right to manage granted despite missing landlord in First-tier Tribunal ruling
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal granted a company the right to manage a property even though the company could not find the landlord. This decision was made after the company followed all the necessary steps outlined in the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002.
⚖️ Legal holding
Where an a company cannot find the landlord, the company may still acquire the right to manage the property if it complies with the necessary statutory requirements.
📖 Technical summary
The claimant successfully acquired the right to manage the property despite the inability to locate the landlord.
📜 Headnote Official document
The claimant applied for the right to manage a property under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, but could not locate the landlord. The Tribunal granted the claimant the right to manage the property after confirming the claimant had followed all necessary procedures.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
Case Reference
:
MAN/16UG/LOA/2020/0001
Property : [NAME], [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Applicant : [redacted]
Mr [RESPONDENT] [NAME] - Director
Respondent: [redacted] : Commonhold & Leasehold Reform Act 2002 – Section 85(2)
Tribunal Member : Laurence Bennett (Tribunal Judge)
Date of Determination : 24 March 2021
DECISION
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2021
2 Application
1. [NAME]) [COMPANY] applies for a determination under Paragraph 85(2) of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 (the Act) that it was entitled to acquire the right to manage [NAME], [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] (the Property).
2. The Property is stated by the Applicant to be an Old Blacksmith Building built into a hill face containing 4 flats, each having their own entrance.
3. The Applicant is a company formed to acquire the right to manage the Property.
4. Following invitation to the Lessees of all flats to participate in the right to manage and notices to them under Section 78 of the Act, a copy of the Tribunal Application was sent to each qualifying tenant by letter dated 7 October 2020.
5. A copy of the Freehold Title number CU106439 dated 12 July 2020 notes that the Proprietor is [RESPONDENT]. That Company is not listed on the Company Register nor can it be found on a Company search.
6. The application was received by the Tribunal on 19 October 2020. On 6 January 2021, [NAME] made directions. These included: In order to satisfy the Tribunal the Applicant will provide a statement of case
a. Setting out in full the steps taken to find the missing Landlord or the evidence to confirm that the Landlord Company has been either dissolved or was never incorporated.
b. Evidencing that the requirements of section 78, 79 and 85 (3) have been complied with.
c. Showing that there are no parties to the leases otherwise than Landlord and Tenants.
d. Describing the premises and the manner in which they have previously been managed.
7. The Applicant provided further documentation including a statement of case and supporting documents in compliance with directions. 8. The Tribunal convened on 24 March 2021 without the parties to make its determination. The Law
9. The relevant law is found in Sections 71 to 113 in Chapter 1 of Part 2 of the Act.
10. Section 74 sets out the persons entitled to be members of a right to manage company. Section 75 specifies who is a qualifying tenant of a flat within the relevant premises. Section 78 makes provision for the notice that must be given by an [COMPANY] to each person who is a qualifying Tenant.
11. Section 79(6) states that the claim notice must be given to each person who on the relevant date is a Landlord under a Lease of the whole or any part of the premises. The relevant date is stated by Section 79(1) as: “The date on which notice of the claim is given.”
3 12. Secti0n 85 contains provisions where an [COMPANY] cannot find or ascertain the identity of any of the persons to whom the claim notice would be required to be given by Section 79(6). 13. Section 90(6) states that where an order is made under Section 85 the acquisition date is the date specified in the order. Evidence and Submissions
14. The Applicant’s evidence and submissions are referred to above. The Applicant has detailed attempts to trace the Landlord and/or other interested parties. Tribunal's conclusions
15. I am satisfied that the Applicant is a Company properly formed to acquire the Right to Manage and that an invitation to participate has been given to all persons entitled. It is observed that the requisite majority of those persons are members of the Company.
16. I accept that the Landlord of the Leases of the flats within the Property is no longer in existence although it is observed that the Land Register has not been amended.
17. The Applicant having complied with directions made by the Tribunal, I am satisfied there are no other steps determined proper for the purpose of tracing relevant persons.
18. I conclude it appropriate that the Applicant [COMPANY] shall acquire the Right to Manage the Property. Order
19. The Tribunal determines that the Applicant is entitled to the right to manage the Property on the date of this order.
Laurence J Bennett Tribunal Judge 24 March 2021
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Secures Right to Manage Despite Uncooperative Landlord
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Right to Manage Property to Claimant
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Claimant Secures Right to Manage Property Through Valid Notice
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Claimant Successfully Acquires Right to Manage Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Reduces Management Fees and Declares Some Service Charges Unpayabl…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) RTM Company Granted Right to Manage Premises Due to Missing Landlord
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal: Airbnb breaches private residence covenant
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Tenant's Right to Manage Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Claimant Successfully Acquires Right to Manage Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rules on Service Charge Disputes
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Granted Right to Freehold Interest Under Leasehold Reform Act
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Ordered to Pay £803.50 in Administration Costs for Unpaid Service Ch…
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 applicant company was properly formed to acquire the right to manage the property.
- The applicant invited all entitled persons to participate, and the required majority became members.
- The landlord of the flats is no longer in existence, despite the Land Register not being updated.
- The applicant complied with all tribunal directions, including detailing steps taken to find the missing landlord.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The claimant was allowed to acquire the right to manage the property.
Who was involved?
The claimant, a company formed to manage the property, and the landlord, who could not be located.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the claimant because the claimant had followed all the necessary steps to comply with the law.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, specifically sections 74, 78, and 85.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The claimant's detailed attempts to trace the landlord and evidence that all necessary steps were followed.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should follow all the necessary steps to comply with the law, even if they cannot locate the landlord.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Documents showing the claimant's attempts to locate the landlord and proof that all necessary steps were followed.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions like this can be appealed to a higher court.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.
