Temporary Manager's Role Discharged in Property Management Case
📌 In brief
In this case, the First-tier Tribunal decided to end the temporary manager's job because the leaseholders and the freeholder had agreed on a new management company to handle the building's affairs.
⚖️ Legal holding
When leaseholders and the freeholder agree on a new management company, a tribunal-appointed temporary manager's role is discharged.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal discharged the temporary manager's appointment due to an agreement between leaseholders and the freeholder.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) discharged the temporary manager's appointment after leaseholders and the freeholder agreed on a new management company, Ashmark Estate Management, to take over the building's management.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AZ/LVM/2015/0022 Property : 113-117 Kirkdale, London [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] appointed manager) Respondents : [redacted] leaseholder of flat 3); (2) [NAME] [NAME] of [COMPANY] (former tribunal-appointed manager); (3) [NAME] [NAME] (freeholder); (4) The current leaseholders of 113-117 Kirkdale. Type of application : Application by a tribunal-appointed manager for directions Tribunal members : Judge Timothy Powell Mrs [NAME] and venue of hearing : 29 October 2019 at 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of this Interim Decision : 29 October 2019
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION discharging the temporary manager
1. The background to this case is set out in the tribunal’s Interim Decision dated 9 August 2019.
2. In its Final Decision of 27 August 2019, the tribunal appointed [NAME] [NAME] as temporary manager of 113-117 Kirkdale, London [POSTCODE] (“the Building”) for a period of 3 months from 1 September 2019, to expire at midnight on 30 November 2019, or as may be determined upon further order of this tribunal. The appointment of [NAME] [NAME] was to be on the same terms and conditions as the existing order. A further hearing was arranged for today, 29 October 2019, for [NAME] [NAME] to attend and to be
2 interviewed as to his suitability for longer-term, permanent appointment as a tribunal-appointed manager.
3. The tribunal has now been notified by [NAME] [NAME] and [NAME] solicitors that leaseholders have agreed with the freeholder that the future management of the Building will be dealt with by Ashmark Estate Management, so that no tribunal-appointed manager will be needed. The effective date of Ashmark’s appointment will be 1 November 2019. 4. [NAME] [NAME] and [NAME] indicated that they would not be attending the hearing today, to save time and resources; and no other party appeared before the tribunal.
5.
Accordingly, the tribunal orders that the temporary appointment of [NAME] [NAME] as tribunal manager shall be discharged with effect from midnight on Thursday, 31 October 2019, so that management of the Building shall revert to the freeholder, [NAME] [NAME], from Friday, 1 November 2019, and the parties can put in place the arrangements they have agreed.
Name: [NAME]: 29 October 2019
Rights of appeal
By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) 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 application for permission must be made to the First- tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with the case. The application for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office within 28 days after the tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the person making the application. If the application is not made within the 28-day time limit, such application 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 application for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The application 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 making the application is seeking. If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Helibar Works Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins: Incorrect Rent Increase Notice Invalidated
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation from Consultation Requirements for …
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Freeholder Granted Dispensation for Emergency Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Allowed to Skip Consultation for Urgent Cladding Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Freehold Premium
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rules on Lease Breaches
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy: Case Summary
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Fire Safety Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Lift Works
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 agreement between leaseholders and the freeholder on a new management company discharges the temporary manager's role.
- The tribunal allows claims where the landlord reasonably bypasses consultation due to urgent safety concerns.
- Applications are successful when the landlord's notice for rent increase is incorrectly filled.
- Claims are allowed when the tribunal calculates the premium based on lease terms and a valuation report.
- Dispensation from consultation requirements is granted when the works are urgent and necessary for significant safety issues.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- Applications to review excessive rents are struck out if made outside the six months following the start of an assured shorthold tenancy.
- Applications under section 22 of the Housing Act 1988 are struck out if the tenancy began more than six months ago.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
It decided to discharge the temporary manager's appointment.
Who was involved?
Leaseholders, the freeholder, and a temporary manager.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to discharge the temporary manager because leaseholders and the freeholder had agreed on a new management company.
Which laws or rules were applied?
No specific laws or rules were mentioned in the decision.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The agreement between leaseholders and the freeholder on a new management company was the central reasoning.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case, as it allowed the agreement to proceed.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure that all parties agree on a new management solution before bringing the matter to court.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The agreement between leaseholders and the freeholder was the key evidence.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Decisions like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) if permission is granted.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
Yes, it is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving property management agreements.
