EG 14-09-1914-09-2019, 22:34
P.51 Company Voluntary Arrangements CVAs are a nightmare for landlords who find that their rent is reduced or their leases handed back and there’s nothing they can do. Must read article fro anyone dealing with L&T. Looks at what the process is, what CVAs can and cannot contain, the option of the landlord to accept the reduced rent or accept the property back and release the tenant from all liabilities including dilaps (!), tenant termination rights, moratoria, and voting (landlord’s future rent claims are worth little so they can’t overturn the CVA)
P 54 HMOs licensing for landlords- what is the licensing regime, what are the mandatory requirements, why, and what security do tenants have, and how are they managed..
P.56 What to do if there is a gap between your development and the highway. Excellent article on a common problem of gaps between the extent of the adopted highway and your ownership. However, reading between the lines, the writers seem to believe that the red line shows the extent of their ownership, which is not true, particularly regarding highways, and doesn’t mention Land Registration Rule 278 which states that roads and ways will never be included in the red line, whether you own them or not. I will be contacting the authors and asking them to comment and will post more here.
P.58 Opposing lease renewal on the grounds of intention to develop after the Francescase. Article look sat two cases in July, the London Kendal St v Daejan, where the the tenant lost in its argument that since the landlord was going to delay them till after 3 months from the end of the lease, that did not suffice, also the EE telecoms mast case where the landlord said it was going to build a telecoms mast to replace the tenants telecoms mast!! The court didn’t believe it would do it so tenant one under Telecommunication code rights (mirroring the need intention under the 54 Act in order to successfully oppose a tenant)
P.59 More detail on the London Kendal St decision mentioned above, and the unusual facts of that case