PDA

View Full Version : Letting leasehold property - notifying freeholder?



jamlip
08-05-2007, 22:29 PM
I own and currently occupy a flat which I would like to rent-out. The flat is leasehold.

I understand that in most cases the leaseholder of a property has to inform the freeholder if they plan to rent-out the property.

However, part of my lease reads: "THE Lessee HEREBY COVENANTS with the Lessor as follows:- (blah...) Not to transfer assign underlet or part with possession of part of the demised premises".

Does this mean I am completely unable to sublet my property?
If not, can they still refuse me the right to sublet the property?
If they were to do this, do I have any recourse (i.e. via the LVT etc)?

I ask because they are total arseholes. Any help much appreciated...

jeffrey
09-05-2007, 09:20 AM
I own and currently occupy a flat which I would like to rent-out. The flat is leasehold.

I understand that in most cases the leaseholder of a property has to inform the freeholder if they plan to rent-out the property.

However, part of my lease reads: "THE Lessee HEREBY COVENANTS with the Lessor as follows:- (blah...) Not to transfer assign underlet or part with possession of part of the demised premises".

Does this mean I am completely unable to sublet my property?
If not, can they still refuse me the right to sublet the property?
If they were to do this, do I have any recourse (i.e. via the LVT etc)?

I ask because they are total arseholes. Any help much appreciated...

If that's all that the lease says, you'll be OK. No consent required.
It prohibits lettings of part of the premises.;
If you let the whole, ie one letting of entire flat, you haven't let "part".
Lease ought to have said "...or part with possession of the whole or any part of the demised premises".

jamlip
09-05-2007, 19:43 PM
Thanks for that Jeffrey. I find it difficult to interpret the lease as these documents never carry commas - an essential element to understanding emphasis and relationships within a sentence!

The building consists of two flats, one upstairs and one downstairs (me). I have a copy of the lease for the flat above and oddly enough it is different to mine only in the points regarding letting - their one contains the usual statement about written consent and consent not being unreasonably withheld. Mine contains only the point already mentioned, which I took to mean (commas added for explanation) "Not to transfer, assign, underlet, or, part with posession of part of, the demised premises". If that makes sense!

I'm really pleased that is not the case...

jeffrey
10-05-2007, 10:14 AM
Thanks for that Jeffrey. I find it difficult to interpret the lease as these documents never carry commas - an essential element to understanding emphasis and relationships within a sentence!

The building consists of two flats, one upstairs and one downstairs (me). I have a copy of the lease for the flat above and oddly enough it is different to mine only in the points regarding letting - their one contains the usual statement about written consent and consent not being unreasonably withheld. Mine contains only the point already mentioned, which I took to mean (commas added for explanation) "Not to transfer, assign, underlet, or, part with posession of part of, the demised premises". If that makes sense!

I'm really pleased that is not the case...

No- I'd read it as, "Not to:

i. transfer;
ii. assign;
iii. underlet; or
iv. part with possession of

part of the demised premises."

Esio Trot
10-05-2007, 10:29 AM
No- I'd read it as, "Not to:

i. transfer;
ii. assign;
iii. underlet; or
iv. part with possession of

part of the demised premises."

Sounds reasonable.

However, I understand lawyers don't like using commas as these can reduce clarity.

My cynical and jaundiced view is that the lack of commas does reduce clarity, and the resulting legal arguments years afterwards create a significant income stream for the profession.

jeffrey
10-05-2007, 10:52 AM
Opaque drafting by L's solicitors, I agree. T's solicitors should have asked for clearer wording when lease was in draft.
Not all solicitors are guilty of this. Clarity can still be achieved without punctuation; it's the wording, not the punctuation, that counts. See example at end of post #2.

jamlip
10-05-2007, 17:26 PM
Thanks again - much appreciated!