Tenant Granted New Lease Under Leasehold Reform Act
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal granted a tenant a new lease under the Leasehold Reform Act 1993. The tribunal determined the appropriate premium to be £38,060, considering various factors including the value of the landlord's interest and the marriage value.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a new lease under section 50 and 51 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal determined the premium for a new lease under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal granted a tenant a new lease under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993, determining the premium to be £38,060. The tribunal considered the diminution in value of the landlord's interest, the landlord's share of the marriage value, and any compensation payable.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/OOAP/OLR/2021/0973 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicants : [redacted] : [RESPONDENT] Respondent : [redacted] Representative : NA Type of [NAME] : Section 50 and 51 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 Tribunal members :
Judge Shepherd Kevin Ridgeway MRICS
Date of determination and venue : at 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] on the papers Date of decision : 12th January 2022
DECISION
Summary of the tribunal’s decision The appropriate premium payable for the new lease is £38060. Background
2 1. This is an [NAME] made by the applicant leaseholders pursuant to section 50 and 51 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (“the Act”) for a determination of the premium to be paid for the grant of a new lease of Ground floor flat 60 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] (the “premises”).
2. On 1st November 2021 [NAME] at Edmonton County Court made an order pursuant to s. 50 of the Act to the effect that the Applicant was entitled to a new lease. The [NAME] is missing. The case was transferred to the Tribunal to determine the value and terms of the new lease. The property
3. The property comprises a one bedroom ground floor flat. 4. The Tribunal are familiar with the location which is increasingly a sought after part of London. It lies to the East of Green Lanes near [ADDRESS]. Green Lanes like many parts of London is being gradually gentrified as a younger more affluent population moves in. The tribunal’s determination
5. The tribunal determines that the value of the new leasehold at the date of the [NAME] was £38060. Reasons for the tribunal’s determination 6. The right to a new lease is conferred by Ch 2 of Pt 1 of the 1993 Act. By exercising the right the tenant acquires a new lease of the flat in substitution for his or her existing lease for a term expiring 90 years
3 after the term date at a peppercorn rent ( s.56(1)). The tenant pays a premium which compensates the landlord for the loss of the remainder of the term. In the present case the landlord is missing and the procedure pursuant to ss50 and 51 of the Act has been followed.
7. The premium for the new lease is calculated in accordance with Sch 13, para 2 of the Act and is the aggregate of the following figures : (a) The diminution in value of the landlord’s interest in the flat; (b) The landlord’s share of the marriage value; (c) Any amount of compensation payable.
8. The calculation by [NAME] is broadly acceptable but The Tribunal has reflected a one percent increase in value of the freehold vacant possession value over the long leasehold value, which is in line with common practice.
9. A calculation carried out by the Tribunal is attached as a schedule to this determination. The premium 10. The tribunal determines the appropriate premium to be £38060 A copy of its valuation calculation is annexed to this decision.
Name: Judge Shepherd Date: 12th January 2022
Rights of appeal
4
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 [NAME] for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with the case. 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).
5 CASE REFERENCE LON/00AC/OLR/2014/0106
First-tier Tribunal Property Chamber (Residential Property)
Valuation under Schedule 13 of the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993
Premium payable for an extended leasehold Interest in [Property]
Valuation date: [Date]
Appendix: Valuation setting out the tribunal’s calculations
Valuation for lease extension [ADDRESS] Date 26/05/2021
Lease Commencement
25/03/1989
Lease Term 99.00 years Expiry Date 24/03/2088 Unexpired Term 66.83 years Long Lease value £338,000 Freehold VP value £341,380 +1% long lease value Term 1 Term 2 Term 3 Ground rent £100.00 £150.00 £200.00 Reversion years 0.83 33.00 34.00 Capitalisation rate 6% Deferment rate 5% Compensation £0.00 [NAME] 82.41%
Diminution of Landlord's interest Ground rent £100 [NAME] 0.83 yrs @ 6.00% 0.786872038 £79 [NAME] £150
[NAME] 33.00 yrs @ 6.00%
14.23022961
PV of £1 0.83 yrs @ 6.00% 0.952787678 £2,034 [NAME] £200
6
[NAME] 34.00 yrs @ 6.00%
14.36814114
PV of £1 33.83 yrs @ 6.00% 0.139284432 £400 Reversion to VP value £341,380 PV 66.83 yrs @ 5.00% 0.03836358 £13,097 Value existing freehold £15,609 L/lord's interest on reversion of new lease FH VP £341,380 PV 156.83 yrs @ 5.00% 0.00047521 -£162 £15,447
7
Landlord's share of Marriage Value Val. Tenant's interest new long lease £338,000 Val. l/lord's interest after reversion of new lease £162 £338,162 Less Val. tenant's interest existing lease [NAME] 82.41% £281,331 Val. l/lord's interest existing lease £15,609 £296,941 £41,222 Marriage Value at 50% £20,611 Compensation £0 PREMIUM £36,058
Say £36,060
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Premium for Collective Enfranchisement
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Lease Premium at £34833
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Premium for New Lease Based on Statutory Formula
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rejects Invalid Rent Increase Notice
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Freehold Premium When Landlord Missing
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Reduces Financial Penalty to £500
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Statutory Lease Extension Granted Where Landlord Cannot Be Found
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Freehold Purchase Premium
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 tribunal determined that the appropriate premium payable for the new lease is £38060.
- The applicant was entitled to a new lease under sections 50 and 51 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993.
- The tribunal increased the freehold vacant possession value by one percent over the long leasehold value, aligning with common practice.
- The property's location is becoming more desirable as a younger, more affluent population moves in.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tribunal granted the tenant a new lease and set the premium at £38,060.
Who was involved?
The tenant applied for a new lease, while the landlord was missing.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the Leasehold Reform Act 1993, calculating the premium according to the act's provisions.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 sections 50 and 51 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The calculation of the premium based on the diminution in value of the landlord's interest and the marriage value was crucial.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was in favour of the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation can apply for a new lease under the same act, provided they follow the correct procedures.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The valuation report and the calculation of the premium were important pieces of evidence.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal within 28 days.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.
