Tenant Entitled to Purchase Freehold Interest at Determined Premium

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00AC/OCE/2020/0011 Property : 65 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [COUNSEL] Respondent: [redacted] : Not known Type of [NAME] : Missing landlord S26 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 Tribunal Members : Judge [NAME] and venue of paper determination : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of Decision : 10 March 2020

DECISION

2 Decision

The tribunal determines

1. That the appropriate premium to be paid into court for the freehold interest of 65 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] is £24,939. (twenty four thousand nine hundred and thirty nine pounds).

2. That the TR1 is approved subject to Box 8 being amended and a note put in Box 11 to show that the premium has been paid into court; and Box 9 amended to show that the transfer is with limited title guarantee.

Background

1. The applicant seeks a determination as to the terms and price at which the respondent’s interest in [ADDRESS] may vest in the applicant, being the nominee purchaser of Mr [APPELLANT] and Mr [NAME], the tenants respectively of 65B and [ADDRESS].

2. On the 1 August 2019 the tenants made an [NAME] to the County Court at Central London under Chapter I of Part I of the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (“the Act”) seeking a vesting order under Section 26 and 27 of the Act providing for the transfer of the freehold interest in the property to the applicant as the landlord cannot be found.

3. HH Judge Wulwik sitting in the County Court at Central London made a vesting order under claim No.F1OC666 transferring the [NAME] to the tribunal for determination of the premium to be paid and to approve the form of the transfer to the applicant.

4. The Tribunal issued Directions on providing for the case to be determined based on the documents alone and without an oral hearing.

5. [ADDRESS] is held on a 99-year lease from 24 December 1984 (approximately 64.40 years unexpired at the valuation date) at a ground rent of £100 p.a. for the remainder of the term. [ADDRESS] is held on a 189-year lease from 24 December 1984 (approximately 154.4 years unexpired at the valuation date) at a peppercorn rent.

Expert Evidence

6. The Tribunal considered an expert report dated of Mr [NAME] of Anderson Wilde & Harris dated 18 February 2020.

7. The property is a terraced house built c1900 and converted into two flats over ten years ago. Access to the flats is via a communal entrance hall. [ADDRESS] is a one bedroom ground floor flat with

3 direct access to a private rear garden. [ADDRESS] is a first floor two-bedroomed flat with no outside space.

8. Mr [NAME] provided comparable evidence to the tribunal of four one bedroom flats in the locality, three of which sold between July and September 2019, and one of which was under offer. Based on these comparables he placed a market value on the long leasehold interest in Flat 65A at the valuation date of £330,000, [NAME] the value of the freehold £333,000.

9. Mr [NAME] provided comparable evidence to the tribunal of four two bedroom flats in the locality, three of which sold between March and September 2019, and one of which was under offer. Based on these comparables he placed a market value on the long leasehold and freehold interest in Flat 65B at the valuation date of £370,000.

10. Mr [NAME] made no time adjustment to his comparables to reflect when they were sold as against the valuation date.

11. Mr [NAME] used a capitalisation rate of 6.5% as reflecting the levels that the Upper Tribunal and the property investment market have recently adopted. He took into account that property had been out performing traditional stocks and shares as a form of investment and that yields have continued to fall over the last three years. He adopted a deferment rate of 5% in line with the decision of the Lands Tribunal in [COMPANY] and others v Sportelli.

12. For Flat 65A Mr [NAME] adopted a relativity of 88.93%, based on the graphs of relativity set out in the RICS Research Paper-Leasehold Reform, and also the Beckett& Kay Graph of Graphs.

13. He therefore calculated the premium payable in respect of Flat 65A to be £24,739, which he rounded down to £24,700.

14. For Flat 65B Mr [NAME] assumed a ground rent of £1 p.a.

15. He calculated the premium payable in respect of Flat 65B to be £200.

Tribunal’s decisions and reasons

16. Capitalisation and Deferment Rate. The Tribunal agrees that 6.5% is an appropriate capitalisation rate for the ground rent for Flat 65A and that there is no reason to depart from the generic deferment rate for flats of 5%.

17. Enfranchisement Price. The Tribunal determines the premium at twenty four thousand nine hundred and thirty nine pounds (£24,939). Having considered the comparables in Mr [NAME] report and his comments on these, the tribunal accepts his market values for the flats, but without rounding up, because this is a statutory valuation. The

4 tribunal also accepts that given the sale dates of the comparables there is no need to make any adjustment for time.

18. The tribunal notes, and has disregarded an apparent typographical error in the valuation for Flat 65B which refers at one point to the sum of £215. The tribunal have also discounted the £15 attributed to the value of the Landlord’s existing interest in Flat 65B as this is based on a ground rent of £1 p.a. The ground rent is a peppercorn.

19. Terms of the Transfer. The TR1 is approved subject to Box 8 being amended and a note put in Box 11 to show that the premium has been paid into court and Box 9 amended to limited title guarantee.

20. The TR1 must reflect the statutory provisions in Schedule 7 of the Act. It should also reflect that the premium is being paid into court.

Name: Judge Pittaway

Date: 10 March 2020

ANNEX 1 - RIGHTS OF APPEAL

1. 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.

2. 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].

3. 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.

4. 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.