Where a residential property let on a long leasehold interest is occupied, the landlord would require a court order in order to forfeit for a breach other than non-payment of rent, service charge or administration charge. If the premises were unoccupied, court proceedings would not necessarily be required as the landlord could peaceably re-enter, but the landlord must not use or threaten violence against anyone in the property. For details of the statutory limitations on the forfeiture of a long leasehold interest for non-payment of rent, service charge or administration charge (which are not considered in this Q&A),

The lease of any individual property will provide in some detail for the provision of monies to be paid for the repair, maintenance and general upkeep of the building and common parts in which a flat is situate. It is often the case that there is an express provision for the freeholder, or management company, to build up a reserve fund in order to protect the leaseholders from having to pay a large and unexpected sum for an urgent expensive repair. If there is no such provision, the leaseholders and management company can agree separately

For the purpose of this Q&A, we have assumed that: ‘The Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 (LT(C)A 1995) provides that any lease granted on or after 1 January 1996 creates what is defined as a “new tenancy” for the purposes of LT(C)A 1995. We assume from the reference to section 23(1) that this query relates to a “new tenancy”…’ We assume that the service charge and ground rent were validly demanded and accordingly fell due before the assignment—in that regard, note that: • in respect of ground rent, a tenant of a long lease (under sections 76 and 77 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 (CLRA

This Q&A raises the issue of which of two types of statutory protection will apply to residential leases. In a case not involving either a social or local authority landlord, it will either be a protected tenancy under the Rent Act 1977 (RA 1977) or an assured tenancy under the Housing Act 1988 (HA 1988). The first point to keep in mind is that a tenancy which is entered into before, or pursuant to a contract

Whether or not a transfer deed, which operates to transfer the registered title to the lease, contains an express covenant by the purchaser/new tenant (T2) to comply with the covenants in the lease, the following provisions nevertheless have effect: • where the lease is an old tenancy (ie one granted before 1 January 1996—see: the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 (LT(C)A 1995), the ancient doctrine of privity of estate applies. Under this doctrine, the burden of all covenants in the lease which ‘touch and concern’ the leasehold estate (which will include any covenant to pay service charge contained in the lease) will pass to T2 (ie such covenants can be enforced against T2). However, T2’s liability under the covenants is restricted to the period

Where a lease is extended under Chapter II of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 and para 10(1) of Part II to Schedule 11 applies, does the intermediate landlord have any obligations under the new lease where it is granted on new terms (rather than by reference to the existing lease)? To summarise this Q&A, the tenant has a lease that has been granted under section 56 or 93(4) of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (LRHUDA 1993) or pursuant to a court order under LRHUDA 1993. There is an intermediate landlord between the tenant and the competent landlord and therefore, LRHUDA 1993, Sch 11 Pt II, para 10 applies. The new lease has been agreed between landlord

A notice requiring possession under section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 (HA 1988) may not be served on an assured shorthold tenant where an Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) has not been provided by the landlord (HA 1988, s 21A(2)(c); the Assured Shorthold Tenancy Notices and Prescribed Requirements (England) Regulations 2015 (AST), SI 2015/1646, reg 2). This requirement applies to all assured shorthold tenancies that began or were renewed after 1 October 2015 but does not apply to assured shorthold tenancies (ASTs) dated prior to this (Minister v Hathaway). Failure to provide an EPC when required

Section 283 of the Insolvency Act 1986 provides that property forming part of the bankrupt's estate includes property 'belonging to or vested in the bankrupt' at the commencement of the bankruptcy but does not extend to property held on trust for another person. See Practice Note: Property that vests in the trustee in bankruptcy on bankruptcy and how the trustee in bankruptcy ascertains the extent of their interest in it. Where there is a pre-existing (and genuine) express declaration of trust, the trustee will clearly take the property subject to

In this Q&A it has been assumed: • that the fixed term of five years has been agreed from the outset • the residential property owner is the freehold proprietor • that the family member has been granted exclusive possession • that there are no exceptional circumstances to rebut an intention to create a tenancy • the family member has been in five years’ continuous occupation • the tenant has never paid rent • that there was no previous tenancy It is not known if the family member occupied the house as its principle home. Any reference to the Government code of practice on illegal immigrants and private rented accommodation has been excluded. In

The leading statement on interpretation of contracts is Lord Hoffmann’s in Investors Compensation Scheme v West Bromwich Building Society. Interpretation is the ascertainment of the meaning which the document would convey to a reasonable person having all the background knowledge which would reasonably have been available to the parties in the situation in which they were at the time of the contract (see Practice Notes: Rules of contract interpretation and Contract interpretation—the guiding principles). While the meaning of the word 'repair' in a tenancy agreement, because of the central importance of the concept of ‘repair’ in the landlord and tenant relationship, carries a technical

It is assumed that no estoppel has arisen by virtue of the landlord making some form of representation to the effect that the lesser sum only is payable. The general rule is that payment of a lesser sum is not satisfaction of a greater debt. A promissory estoppel might arise as a result of the landlord’s representation, but as a rule it merely suspends the obligation so that it can be reinstated on giving reasonable notice—see Hughes v Metropolitan Railway. In an exceptional case, if a tenant can show detrimental reliance upon a representation by undertaking some additional indebtedness or duty, the original obligation might be extinguished. In any other case, the first point to consider is the six-year period imposed

The right to acquire a new lease Chapter II of Part 1 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (LRHUDA 1993) makes provision for an individual tenant of a flat to acquire a new lease of the flat which they occupy. The right to acquire a new lease is only available to a ‘qualifying tenant’, which in essence means that the tenant must be the tenant under a long lease (see LRHUDA 1993, ss 38, 39(3), (5) where the term ‘qualifying tenant’ is defined). Section 42 notices The procedure for a tenant to acquire a new lease in accordance with LRHUDA 1993 is set out in LRHUDA 1993, s 42 onwards. The procedure is started by the tenant serving a notice on their landlord and any third party to the lease in accordance with LRHUDA 1993, s 42. LRHUDA