Lindsay Court (St Annes) RTM Company Limited

The Project

The objective was for the leaseholders to take control of management of their block of flats, which is situated on a wider estate.  This could be achieved by exercise of the RTM, under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 (the Act).

The Act gives owners of leasehold flats a mechanism to take control of management, allowing them to run their own affairs and to make decisions about the management and upkeep of their flats, including but not limited to the insurance, repairs and service charges.

This is a no-fault procedure. There is no need to prove mismanagement by the landlord or the current managing company and the landlord does not have to consent in order for leaseholders to exercise the right.  It is however a complex area of law in which the property dispute resolution team at Woodcocks, Haworth and Nuttall hold extensive experience, enabling them to guide clients through the process to help them achieve their aims.

What WHN Delivered

In this instance, the landlord and Tribunal appointed manager sought to frustrate all attempts to acquire the RTM.  The matter went through several First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) applications and an appeal under the guidance of our expert property dispute resolution team. The Property Chamber is a body administered by HM Courts and Tribunals Service, which handles applications, appeals and references relating to disputes over property and land.

The First-Tier Tribunal appointed manager applied for an Order extending his appointment as Manager. He sought, as part of that application, to terminate the RTM, once acquired by the RTM company, by variation of the existing management order.

The First-tier Tribunal found in favour of the RTM company. The manager appealed to the Upper Tribunal, however, it was dismissed.

In July 2020, our client was wholly successful in the RTM Proceedings. The Upper Tribunal’s decision in D Bentham v Lindsay Court (St Annes) RTM Co Limited [2021] UKUT 4 (LC) confirmed the First Trier Tribunal’s decision that it did not have jurisdiction to vary the management order to deprive our client of its functions as an RTM company.

We successfully obtained two determinations on behalf of our client under Section 20c of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, to the effect that the costs incurred by the Manager in the RTM proceedings and the management proceedings could not be recharged to the leaseholders of the RTM company, by way of the service charge.

The First-Tier Tribunal proceedings relating to the appointment of a manager across the development, continued until Judgment was given on 19^th September 2024.

The RTM company put forward submissions in relation to the management of ancillary premises and the wider estate based on the decision of the Supreme Court in FirstPort Property Services Ltd v Settlers Court RTM Company and others [2022] UKSC 1. In that case the Supreme Court held that, to be included within the RTM, the appurtenant property must be enjoyed exclusively by the self-contained building forming the basis of the RTM application.

The leaseholders of the wider estate attempted to remove the manager within the proceedings relating to the variation of the manager’s current management order, however, ultimately served their own RTM claim notices.  Our client remained a party to those proceedings for the purpose of ensuring that the terms of any management order reflect the respective powers of the RTM company and manager over defined areas and to clarify the leaseholders’ contribution to the wider estate charges.

On the 19^th September 2024, the Tribunal varied the terms of the manager’s appointment and ultimately, discharged him with effect from 1^st November 2024, subject to compliance with the conditions of discharge.

Our team were grateful to have had the opportunity to represent these leaseholders, who in the main were elderly, to guide them through this complex area of law and ensure that their rights and interests were protected.