Tenant Granted Lease Extension: Premium Set at £31,470
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal ruled that a tenant could extend their lease of a flat and set the premium at £31,470 based on the property's value and remaining lease term.
⚖️ Legal holding
Under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993, a tenant is entitled to extend their lease and pay a premium calculated based on the property's value and remaining lease term.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined the premium for extending the lease of a flat under the Leasehold Reform Act 1993.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined that the tenant was entitled to extend the lease of their flat under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993. The premium payable was set at £31,470.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
Case Reference
: LON/OOAF/OLR/2018/0667
Property : [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Applicant: [redacted] : [COUNSEL], Solicitors
Respondent: [redacted] : None
Type of [NAME] : Enfranchisement
Tribunal Members:
Judge Robert Latham
Mrs [NAME]
Date and venue of : Paper determination on 9 July 2018 at Hearing
: [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Date of Decision : 12 July 2018
________________________________
DECISION ________________________
(i) The Tribunal determines that the premium payable by the Applicant for an extension of his lease of [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] to be £31,470.
(ii) The Tribunal approves proposed draft of the deed of surrender and re- grant.
FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
2
Background
1. The Applicant is claiming the right to acquire a new lease of his flat, namely [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] (“the flat”) pursuant to the provisions of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 ("the Act"). On 23 March 2018, District Judge Lightman, sitting at the Central London County Court, upon being satisfied that the [RESPONDENT] could not be found, made a vesting order under section 50(1) of the Act. He transferred the matter to this Tribunal to determine the terms of the new lease and the premium payable.
Evidence
2. We have been provided with a valuation report by [NAME], dated 4 April 2018. He computes the premium to be £31,740. He inspected the property on 18 July 2016.
3. We have also been provided with a draft deed of surrender and re-grant.
Lease details
4. The Applicant currently holds the flat under a lease, dated 26 August 1982, for a term of 99 years from 1 January 1982. The Valuation Date is 21 July 2017 when the unexpired term was 63.45 years. The flat consists of two bedrooms, a living room, a kitchen and a shower room, on the ground floor of a converted three-storey semi-detached house. There is a private rear garden. There are no relevant tenant’s improvements.
Long Lease Value
5. Mr [APPELLANT] has regard to three comparables: (i) [ADDRESS]; (ii) Ground Floor Flat, [ADDRESS]; and (iii) First Floor flat, [ADDRESS]. We are satisfied with the adjustments which he has made to the comparables. We approve his assessment of the existing lease value of £386,100 and the 1% uplift to determiner a freehold value of £390,000.
Relativity
6. Mr [NAME] has taken a figure of 87.4%, namely the average of the five RICS’s graphs for Greater London and the rest of England. In the absence of any evidence of local transactions, we are satisfied that this approach is justified. Other valuer’s might suggest that other graphs should be considered. However, we are content to determine relativity on the evidence before us.
Capitalisation Rate
7. [NAME] takes a figure of 6.5%. We approve this.
3
Deferment Rate
8. We approve the “Sportelli” rate of 5% for deferment which Mr [NAME] has adopted.
Calculation of the Premium
9. We have checked Mr [NAME] calculation and approve his assessment of the premium in the sum of £31,740. [NAME]’ valuation is at p.43 of the Bundle.
Judge Robert Latham 12 July 2018
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.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Granted Right to New Lease Under 1993 Act
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Lease Extension Premium
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Premium for Lease Extension
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Lease Extension Premium
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Lease Extension Premium Under 1993 Act
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Lease Extension Premium
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Granted Premium for 90-Year Lease Extension
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Secures Lease Extension in Missing Landlord Case
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Premium for Lease Extension
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Granted Lease Extension Premium by First-tier Tribunal
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 tenant is entitled to extend their lease under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993.
- The premium for lease extension is calculated based on the property's value and remaining lease term.
- The tenant is entitled to an appropriate premium for extending their lease based on the Act's provisions.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant's request was dismissed due to issues unrelated to the lease extension process itself.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tenant was entitled to extend the lease of their flat and the premium payable was set at £31,470.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the missing landlord were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the valuation of the property and the remaining lease term, following the Leasehold Reform Act 1993.
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 of the property and the calculation of the premium were the central arguments.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may be able to extend their lease and calculate the premium based on the same criteria.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The valuation report and the draft deed of surrender and re-grant were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a party can appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) within 28 days of receiving the written reasons.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving lease extensions.
