Tenant Granted Statutory Lease Extension Despite Untraceable Landlord

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2014

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AU/OLR/2023/0339 Property : 464B [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [NAME] Respondent : [redacted] : Not applicable (missing landlord) Type of application : Application under sections 50 and 51 of the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 Tribunal member :

[NAME] [NAME] Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of paper determination : 2 August 2023 Revised 9th August 2023

DECISION

We exercise the powers under Rule 50 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013 to correct the clerical mistake, accidental slips or omissions at 9(i) and 9(iv) under the heading ‘Decisions of the tribunal’ of the Decision dated 2 August 2023 . The amendments are made in bold and underlined.

2 Decisions of the Tribunal (1) The tribunal determines that the price to be paid by the applicant for the new lease on statutory terms is £71,800. The Background 1. This is an application under section 50 and 50(1) of the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (“the 1993 Act”) pursuant to an order made by Deputy District Judge Grant, sitting at the County Court at Central London on 16 January 2023 (“the order”).

2. Sections 50 and 50(1) of the 1993 Act concerns claims for a statutory lease extension where the relevant landlord cannot be found. It enables the court to make a vesting order in respect of any interests of the landlord which are liable to acquisition.

3. Under section 51 of the 1993 Act, the role of the tribunal is to determine the appropriate sum to be paid into court in respect of the landlord’s interests.

4. The applicant in this matter is [NAME] [APPELLANT] [NAME]. He is the qualifying tenant of 464B [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] (“the Property”). The respondent freehold owner is [NAME] [APPELLANT].

5. On 8 March 2022, the applicant issued a Part 8 Claim at the County Court at Central London for an order pursuant to section 50(1) of the 1993 Act seeking a new lease in the Property. The applicant has been unable to ascertain the whereabouts of the respondent.

6. The applicant subsequently applied for a vesting order under section 49(3) of the 1993 Act. The vesting order was granted subject to the determination of this tribunal. The order dispensed with the statutory requirement to serve a section 42 notice on the Defendant.

7. The applicant has provided the tribunal with a valuation report prepared by Ms [NAME] BA MRICS RICS Registered Valuer dated 19th June 2023.

8. Ms [NAME] is of the view that the premium to be paid for the statutory lease extension is £60,000 as at the valuation date of 8th March 2022. The Determination 9. After careful scrutiny the tribunal accepts the opinions expressed by Mrs [NAME] in her valuation report dated 19th June 2023 save that:

3 (i) The Tribunal has adopted current long leasehold values in vacant possession for the first and second floor flat of £600,000. After careful consideration of the submitted Structural Condition Reviews prepared by [NAME] dated 8 December 2017 and 18 March 2023 the Tribunal conclude that a realistic deduction from the long leasehold Market Value to reflect condition is £20,000. The indicative repair cost figure of around £14,450 provided by the Structural Engineer is relied upon in arriving at this sum.

(ii) The Expert provides no cogent evidence to support her assertion that the value of the dwelling will be impaired after remedial works are carried out. In particular of the risk that “insurance will be unobtainable” This is not the experience of the Tribunal.

(iii) The Tribunal are not persuaded that the value of the listed improvements carried out by the Applicant during his tenancy amounts to £50,000. Many of the works listed are maintenance rather than improvements to the dwelling. The Tribunal determine that the sum to be deducted to reflect enhanced value from improvement works amounts to £20,000.

(iv) After adoption of the revised deductions as explained above (i-iii) the adjusted long leasehold value is assessed as £560,000.

10. The adjusted calculation has resulted in a premium of £71,800. A copy of the Tribunal’s valuation is attached to this decision.

11.

Accordingly, the Tribunal determines that the premium to be paid in respect of the statutory Lease Extension of 464B [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] is £71,800.

12. The Tribunal also approves the draft transfer which has been submitted by the applicant, subject to the inclusion in box LR7 and 1.1 that the consideration has been paid into court. The premium payable is £71,800 less any summarily assessed costs. The Tribunal also notes that at “Property” (s 1.1) in the draft lease the dwelling is referred to as 32B [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE], page 89 of the bundle. This should be corrected.

13. This matter should now be returned to the County Court sitting at Central London under Claim Number [POSTCODE] 728 in order for the final procedures to take place.

4

[NAME] 2 August 2023 Revised and corrected 9 August 2023 Appendix A : Premium Valuation

5