Extending my lease

eddddy

Deleted_User said:

And if a freeholder really wants to demolish their building, do you seriously think they won’t find a way to buy you out? 

Hmmm - that's starting to sound a bit like a conspiracy theory.

Deleted_User said:

 It seems a bit of a ridiculous worry considering it doesn’t happen often and you still have to be compensated. However, it did happen to my aunt, and she simply bought another (better) flat up the road, so not a big deal.

Ok - so just to help future readers of this thread understand... because it's all got a bit confusing.

You originally told @jrawle that he/she was wrong about the law - you said the law had changed.

But you're now agreeing that @jrawle was right about the law, and you were wrong.

(And instead you're now suggesting that piece of law doesn't matter because you don't think that piece of the law will be used often - which might be a valid point.)



It's a real shame when a thread 'goes off the rails' like this. I suspect the OP and other people will just give up reading it, because it becomes too confusing to follow.

 

blinko

How has the law changed , 

eddddy

blinko said:

How has the law changed , 

The law hasn't changed.

A poster was wrongly claiming that a specific aspect of the law had changed - but they've deleted their 3 posts now.

So the thread probably doesn't make so much sense now.

blinko

eddddy said:

blinko said:

How has the law changed , 

The law hasn't changed.

A poster was wrongly claiming that a specific aspect of the law had changed - but they've deleted their 3 posts now.

So the thread probably doesn't make so much sense now.

thanks a lot  for confirming edddy, to the poster why did you say that the law had changed when it hadn't and then delete your posts?