Q&As

The tenant has served a section 42 notice to extend their lease. However, they have requested a term of 155 years from the original term rather than 215 years or the residue plus 90 years will this invalidate the notice?

read titleRead full title
Produced in partnership with Kate Andrews of Hamlins
Published on LexisPSL on 15/08/2017

The following Property Q&A produced in partnership with Kate Andrews of Hamlins provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • The tenant has served a section 42 notice to extend their lease. However, they have requested a term of 155 years from the original term rather than 215 years or the residue plus 90 years will this invalidate the notice?
  • Practical points

The tenant has served a section 42 notice to extend their lease. However, they have requested a term of 155 years from the original term rather than 215 years or the residue plus 90 years will this invalidate the notice?

A section 42 notice under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (LRHUDA 1993) must be served on the competent landlord (and any third parties to the lease—not discussed here) specifying the following:

  1. name of the tenant and sufficient information about the flat to identify the property in respect of which the claim is made

  2. details of the current lease

  3. the premium proposed for the new lease

  4. the terms proposed for the new lease

  5. the name and address of the person appointed to act for the leaseholder, and an address for notices; and

  6. a date by which the landlord must serve a counter-notice under LRHUDA 1993, s 45

See Practice Notes: The right to an extended lease—flats and Lease extension—s 42 notice.

A notice may be defective for two reasons under the LRHUDA 1993 if:

  1. if it does not meet the requirements of the LRHUDA 1993; or

  2. if the leaseholder is not entitled to exercise the right under

Related documents:

Popular documents