Lease hold extension crazy situation

mikepartridge1

I have a 99 year lease with 59 years remaining. I am now selling the flat (I do not live in it, it is rented out). I have a great cash offer but the buyer wants the lease extended, in fact the buyer is a lawyer who is doing his own conveyancing. The freehold is owned by a company of which the leaseholders are each 1/4 shareholders (there are 3 other flats) ie a shared freehold. My lawyer told me that last year the other 3 flats owners all agreed as leaseholders and shareholders that they should extend their leases to 999 years. Thy did not charge themselves a premium for obvious reason (all flats originally had the same 99 year lease. I was unaware that they had done this. I have had numerous disputed with the other flat owners who are controlled by the Company Secretary and owner o one flat. I have successfully been to the LVT over ridiculous service charges and to the Royal Court in London over mis use of company funds. They paid out of court 100% of my costs. I have been completely blocked from all aspects of the company business and receive no information. I know I have a right to a lease extension via the LVT if necessary but my lawyer says she believes they could try and charge us a premium which I find outrageous. They have already indicated they are seeking legal advice which is not a good sign. Surely they have to give the lease extension on the same terms as their own ie no premium otherwise they are acting against me as an equal shareholder in the freehold. The premium would be substantial due to value of the flat but it is more the delays if I have to go to court, I will lose the sale or have to reduce the price which the buyer is already likely to do so is taking advantage (cant blame him for that) and I am sure he knows ultimately he will get it for no premium if he buys. The whole situation is ridiculous as the whole purpose is for leaseholders who are also freeholders to avoid premiums as you are essentially charging yourself. Why should they profit or even be allowed to essentially blackmail me in this way. I ask only that we are treated equally.

olly300

Have you worked out what you have done to p*ss them all off before you went to court?

Basically they are bearing a grudge towards you and without taking legal action you need to workout a way out.

Maybe getting your buyer to introduce themselves to everyone in the building so they know if the sale goes through you will be gone may help as it's clear they don't want you around.

Otherwise you have to take legal advice and go to the LVT.

Ulfar

You will need to go back to LVT, but you may not get the extension at the same rate as they already extended at.

propertyman

The lvt are of no help to you.

The freeholding company ( irrespective of who the shareholders are) is entitled to the vlaue of the extended lease, which is paid to the company and dispersed to the shareholders.

As this is the result of poor advice on the purchase not to immediately extend all the leases on completion of the FH purchase, your redress is against the company, and the directors in person.

You threaten to sue for the proceeds (or their failure to realise any), as set out in the articles, of the last 3 extensions to the other 3, plus costs and interest, and throw in the threat of penalties for failing to notify of you or conduct for example and general meetings.

Of course what has been overlooked is that if as leaseholder you challenge service charges, the freeholder has to make up the shortfall.

That would require you as shareholder to pay into the company to prevent it from becoming insolvent ( Please don't sputter but the LVT said..... you do).

While there are certain resolutions they would have to create to compel,as they can, you to do so, this is their way of recovering that contribution.

You need detailed advice from a company lawyer not an LVT hearing.