9, 9A and 9B Chester Road, Branksome Park
- The building
- A three-storey house converted into three self-contained flats. Each party occupies one of them and the freehold is held in equal halves by two of the leaseholders.
- What was applied for
- Appointment of a manager under section 24 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987, with a section 20C order and reimbursement of fees.
- The figures
- Three flats. Lease of 99 years from 29 September 1999 with external painting at least every five years. Application fee £114 and hearing fee £227.
- Costs
- The section 20C order and the fee reimbursement were both refused. The tribunal held that granting them would be unjust given the applicants' lack of success and their failure to take considered note of the practice statement.
What Happened
A joint condition report was commissioned in 2022, the freeholders' relationship broke down that year and almost none of the identified works were done. The applicants nominated a co-freeholder as manager, substituted an external manager who then withdrew, and reinstated the co-freeholder days before the hearing.
What the Tribunal Held
Breach of the repairing and five-yearly external decorating covenants was established and it was just and convenient to appoint a manager, but the application was dismissed because the nominee was unsuitable. The tribunal held that repainting by individual parties of their respective sections of the building does not amount to compliance with an obligation to decorate the building as a whole, and that a property may be in good standing subject only to defects characteristic of its age and still be in need of repair, the two not being mutually exclusive. It found the threshold for the second requirement rather higher than the first, appointment being a remedy of last resort. The nominee met none of the six requirements in the tribunal's practice statement, could not say how he would handle a lessee refusing to pay, and did not know whether he would be able to cope.
What it means for a block here. Proving breach, and even proving that a manager is needed, wins nothing if the nominee fails the practice statement. A conflicted leaseholder nominee sinks the whole application and the fees with it.