LVT/0081/03/14: 41 Furzeland Drive, Neath
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Applied Rules | Leasehold Reform Act 1967 - Absent Landlord |
| Date | 02 September 2014 |
| Year | 2014 |
| Subject Matter | Section 27 |
| Court | Leasehold Valuation Tribunals |
| Judgement Number | LVT/0081/03/14 |
Page 1 of 19
Y TRIBIWNLYS EIDDO PRESWYL
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TRIBUNAL
LEASEHOLD VALUATION TRIBUNAL
Reference: LVT/0081/03/14
In the Matter of 41 Furzeland Drive, Bryncoch, Neath, SA10 7UG
In the matter of an Application under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967
TRIBUNAL Timothy Walsh (Chairman)
Ruth Thomas (Surveyor)
Peter Tompkinson (Surveyor)
APPLICANT Mr. Gary Frazer Aitchison
RESPONDENT Unknown Owner of the Freehold
REASONS FOR THE DECISION OF THE LEASEHOLD VALUATION TRIBUNAL
Introduction
1. The Applicant, Mr. Gary Frazer Aitchison, is one of two registered proprietors of the
leasehold interest in the property known as, and located at, 41 Furzeland Drive in Bryncoch,
Neath (“the Property”). The leasehold interest is registered at HM Land Registry under title
number WA115929. The second registered proprietor is Mrs. Pamela Aitchison.
2. The Lease was dated 23 December 1970 and was for a term of 99 years from 25 March 1969;
the original parties were Melville Gwyn Morgan (as landlord) and Glynne Jones (as tenant).
It is apparent that this was what is generally known as a building lease under which, by
clause 4(b), the original tenant covenanted to build a dwelling-house upon what was then
plot number 7 on the Bryncoch Estate. By Clause 3 the rent under the Lease was a yearly
rent of £20.00 payable by equal half-yearly instalments. There is no provision in the Lease
for rent review.
Page 2 of 19
3. Section 1 of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 (“the Act”) confers on a tenant of a leasehold
house a right to acquire on fair terms the freehold of the house and premi ses where certain
the landlord cannot be found. Specifically section 27(1) of the 1967 Act provides that:
27(1) Where a tenant of a house having a right under this Part of this Act to acquire the
freehold is prevented from giving notice of his desire to have the freehold because the person
to be served with th e notice cannot be found, or his identity cannot be ascertained, then on
an application made by the tenant the court may, subject to and in accordance with the
provisions of this section, make such order as the court thinks fit with a view to the house and
premises being vested in him, his executors, administrators or assigns for the like estate and
on the like terms (so far as the circumstances permit) as if he had at the date of his
application to the court given notice of his desire to have the freehold.
4. Both registered proprietors issued proceedings in the Swansea County Court on 7 February
2013. It is unnecessary to recount the detail of that claim save that we note that it refers to
a valuation of the freehold reversion by Astleys Chartered Surveyors in the sum of £4,850,
We were not presented with a copy of any such valuation however.
5. By order of District Judge J Garland Thomas the County Court determined that it was
satisfied that all proper steps by way of advertisement and otherwise had been taken for the
purpose of tracing the landlord and it was ordered that:
5.1 The Applicants were entitled pursuant to the provisions of section 1 and section
27(1) of the 1967 Act to have invested in them the freehold of the Property.
5.2 The terms upon which the Applicants were entitled to have freehold vested in them
were to be determined by the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal as if the applicants had,
and the form of conveyance which is to contain such matters as it may be
appropriate to include pursuant to section 27(3) of the 1967 Act.
6. By an application dated 14 February 2014, but received by the Tribunal on 11 March 2014,
Leasehold Valuation Tribunal is the tribunal with jurisdiction to determine the price payable
under section 9(1) of the 1967 Act for a house and premises.
To continue reading
Request your trial