Episodes
Monday Jun 17, 2019
The Agenda: The law of forfeiture is oppressive
Monday Jun 17, 2019
Monday Jun 17, 2019
In the latest episode of "The Agenda", Jonathan Seitler QC's alliterative agenda is this: the law of forfeiture is oppressive, obsolete and otiose.
Seitler argues that it is oppressive "both when it is used and when it is not used", putting fear into tenants, and that it is old-fashioned and unnecessary.
However, Jeremy Stephen, associate director at Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner argues that forfeiture is not oppressive and you cannot have leasehold title without it - and he has a special prop with him to prove his point.
Will Seitler or Stephen persuade you to his point of view?
Version: 20240320
Comments (1)
To leave or reply to comments, please download free Podbean or
I am a leaseholder in a building of 32 flats. If I had known about potential forfeiture beforehand, I would never have bought a long leasehold property. I consulted 2 solicitors and did some research before buying. My solicitor did a reasonable job in highlighting a fee term in the lease. Clear terms are needed at point of sale, not buried in an opaque lease - name of freeholder, managing agent, ground rent and increasing terms, service charge, permission and admin fees, lease length. All leasehold buyers to get the government "How to lease" document. Unjustified windfall to the freeholder finally mentioned by Jonathan near the end. A shorthold tenant or long leaseholder who is drug dealing from their flat needs to be removed. The shorthold tenant has just lost his deposit, the long leaseholder all the value he has paid for the lease so very excessive, and the freeholde r gets his windfall, maybe having only paid 1% of the value of the building for the freehold interest. The leasehold ers pay for everything else. This conversation also highlighted lawyers pleasuring themselves at leaseholders expense.
Tuesday Aug 06, 2019
To leave or reply to comments,
please download free Podbean App.