header-logo header-logo

18 October 2018 / Mark Chick
Issue: 7813 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

All change in residential leasehold?

Are we moving towards significant reforms in enfranchisement? Mark Chick examines the key points from the Law Commission’s recent consultation paper

The Law Commission’s consultation paper on proposed reforms to enfranchisement legislation, published on 20 September, runs to 564 pages and asks for views on 135 questions relating to the proposed changes, some of which are quite radical. A copy of the consultation, Leasehold home ownership: buying your freehold or extending your lease , which closes on 20 November 2018 can be found here.

The proposed reforms, some of which are outlined below, make sweeping changes to the whole process of enfranchisement and also propose radical reform to the basis of valuation aiming ‘reduce the price’ paid on enfranchisement. There are also suggestions of a fixed or no-costs regime for landlords, and so the proposed changes are therefore in essence political as they seek to reverse the emphasis between landlords and tenants.

The most sweeping suggestion from a technical point of view is the suggestion that there should be a single scheme of enfranchisement

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll