Leasehold enfranchisement—residential focus

The term 'leasehold enfranchisement' includes rights to:

•
extend a residential lease, and
•
acquire the freehold

The purpose of those rights is to enable tenants to continue occupation of their residential property at a fair price and on fair terms. It also allows leaseholders to maintain capital value and the ability to mortgage.

Mortgage lenders look unfavourably on leases with less than 70 years left to run.

The exercise of any of the rights below involves detailed procedures. Strict deadlines apply for the service of notices and counter-notices and subsequent steps in the process. Even if a right is admitted, a claim may lapse if time limits are overlooked. Although often referred to generically as 'leasehold enfranchisement', the qualifying criteria, forms of notice and time limits for each right are different, and it is essential before initiating any of the procedures to ensure that each successive step is mapped out and understood.

The valuation process for freehold acquisitions and lease extensions is also complex. Again, the detailed rules for each right are different and specialist advice should be obtained before launching

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Property News

Law Society comments on Renters' Rights Bill

The Law Society has commented on the Renters' Rights Bill, which is scheduled for its second reading in the House of Lords. While supporting the Bill’s proposed reforms, such as banning 'no-fault' evictions and ending rental bidding wars, the Law Society has expressed concerns that the Bill may be ineffective without clearer enforcement provisions and increased funding for the justice system. Additionally, it highlights that the Bill could lead to more contested hearings, as landlords will now need to demonstrate good reason for eviction, and a surge of cases entering the court system, as renters will have an increased ability to challenge evictions. The Law Society calls on the government to clarify how it plans to equip courts with adequate resources to handle this anticipated increase in demand, while managing existing backlogs. Although the Law Society welcomes the government's proposals to increase housing legal aid fees, it also emphasises the need for further expansion of legal aid to ensure renters can obtain legal advice at an earlier stage.

HM Land Registry updates Practice Guides 26, 27, and 64

HM Land Registry (HMLR) has updated three practice guides: Practice Guide 26—Leases: determination, Practice Guide 27—The leasehold reform legislation, and Practice Guide 64— Prescribed clauses leases.

Property weekly highlights—30 January 2025

This week's edition of Property weekly highlights includes: the coming into force of certain enfranchisement provisions under the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, a case on defective works and building liability orders under the Building Safety Act 2022 and cases on tenancies at will, service charges, a ‘forced disposal’ and boundary disputes.

High Court finds a ‘building safety risk’ which could lead to the making of a ‘building liability order’ under the Building Safety Act 2022 and permits RTM company to claim damages on behalf of leaseholders (381 Southwark Park Road RTM & Various Leaseholders v Click St Andrews)

Property Disputes analysis: This is the first High Court case to hold that defective works by a developer gave rise to a ‘relevant liability’ as a result of a ‘building safety risk’ under section 130(3)(b) of the Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA 2022), paving the way for the claimant right to manage company (RTM Co) to apply at a subsequent hearing for a building liability order (BLO) against the parent company of the insolvent developer. The Technology and Construction Court (TCC) gave guidance on the procedure for seeking a BLO. Further, the RTM Co was, under an agreement to purchase the property, able to recover against the developer and by extension against the parent company as guarantor, all of the individual leaseholders’ losses for breach of covenant in their leases. Written by Tiffany Scott, barrister, Wilberforce Chambers.