Tenants Rights - Changes to the rules

The Civil Procedure Rules are being amended and some of those amendments have consequences for mortgage lenders who have mortgages over tenanted (rather than owner-occupied) property.

In particular the rule changes will allow tenants about whom the lender has no knowledge (that is to say tenants who the property owner has not told the lender about!) who are living in a mortgaged property to apply to the court for postponement of any repossession order granted in favour of the lender.

That obviously has repercussions for lenders being able to sell the property to recover their loan.

The new rules also require lenders to notify tenants and occupiers of a property before taking steps to enforce a possession order.

In those circumstances any tenant who the lender has had no previous knowledge of can apply to the lender for a delay repossession to allow the tenant time to find another home.

If the lender does not agree to an extension of time the tenant may apply to the court for a decision.

At the moment we can only speculate about what effect these changes may have on the willingness of lenders to make mortgage advances to landlords in relation to "buy to let" properties.

Changes to the Building Regulations

The Government has published two new sets of legislation relating to the building control regime in England and Wales.

Many of the changes in the new regulations deal with "tidying up" the current regulations in order to make them easier to understand (we hope!)

In addition, though, there are also some more meaty changes - including the widening of the provisions for self-certification to cover a greater range of activities which deal with the improvement of the energy efficiency of a building.

A proper understanding of the new provisions is vital for anyone who regularly deals with building control issues- especially those businesses whose bread and butter is dealing with construction and property.

The new rules come into force on 1 October 2010, but it may be some while after that before detailed guidance is published.  Until that guidance is forthcoming, anyone seeking clarification on the new regulations will need to look at the government's documentation showing the differences between the 2000 and 2010 regulations.

Buckles seminar and workshop programme

Tomorrow evening (16th September) we are putting on a seminar which will be of interest to landlords regardless of the profile of their property portfolio since it deals with something  which is currently of conern to all landlords - the insolvency of a tenant.

If you would like to attend, or would like further information, please contact Sara Coggins on 01733 888735 or by email at sara.coggins@buckles-law.co.uk

On Thursday 23rd and 30th September the firm's social housing team is running a seminar dealing with issues affecting social landlords.

On 6th October the firm's employment team is running a seminar dealing with the issue of restrictive covenants in employment contracts - an area of law which is a caselaw minefield!

Finally in October, the firm's commecial property team is hosting a much more laid back event - we're going to be indulging in some wine tasting!

If you'd like to attend any of the above seminars or events, or would like to be placed on the firm's mailing lists for future events please contact Sara Coggins (as above!)

Rave Reviews for Buckles!

The independent client's guide to law firms, the Legal 500, published its 2010 edition online yesterday - some really great reviews for the teams here and individuals within those teams!  Check out what the Legal 500 has to say about the firm here - http://tinyurl.com/2wd7hzl

Another Accident at Work story..........

A worker who slipped in flooded toilets has won an undisclosed sum in compensation.


The man worked at a community centre and went to investigate a problem in the toilets. Someone had put the plugs in the washbasins and left the taps running and water had overflowed onto the floor. As he went to turn off the taps, the man slipped and fell, fracturing his elbow.



It emerged that this was not the first time someone had deliberately caused a flood at the premises. There had been a similar incident in another set of toilets at the community centre. However, no action had been taken on the part of the man’s employer to prevent the potential problem, such as removing the plugs or fitting each tap with a flow-limiting device.

The man brought a personal injury claim, but his employer denied liability for the accident. In court, the judge found that the employer had failed to put in place adequate health and safety measures. As well as steps to prevent a recurrence of flooding, there should have been a system in place for making regular checks on the toilets as the community centre was used by members of the public. Also, training should have been provided on how to deal safely with a flooding incident.

Council Tax on Houses in Multiple Occupation

The High Court has just decided (in the case of R (Goremsandu) v London Borough of Harrow)  that the landlord of a house in multiple occupation (HMO) was not liable to pay council tax to the local authority and that the liability remained with the tenants.

 

Given that many local authorities have been actively pursuing landlords for the payment of council tax where tenants have failed to pay, there will be many investors this morning heaving a sigh of relief!

James Maxey says Never Say Never

This week has seen the launch of the mediation website www.mediated-solutions.co.uk and as always when mediation is discussed, inevitably it leads to me being asked by clients and lawyers alike if mediation really works. It is 14 years since I first experienced mediation and the biggest thing that has changed in that time is the increasingly enlightened attitude of clients and lawyers who are finally recognising that, without any sign of weakness, the willingness to sit down with a neutral third party and explore creative solutions to a dispute can actually bring savings of time and money.

“But why do we need a mediator” is the next chirpy comment that emerges. “If we can’t settle it ourselves sitting round the table then a mediator could never settle it”. But this misses the invaluable dynamic a mediator can bring to a settlement meeting.

A mediator is neutral and can talk to the parties without being for or against their case. A mediator is objective and can test the realities. A mediator should be the trusted honest broker. Most importantly, a mediator is confidential and can get into the unique position of fully understanding both of the parties private positions and therefore seeing if there is any overlap.

And the reasons mediations fail?

In my own experience around 90% of mediations result in settlement, and of disputes where I have been appointed as mediator, so far 2010 has a 100% success rate. But the major impediment I usually see is a lack of preparation. It is essential that the clients and their lawyers have spent some serious time thinking about what is actually achievable if they take their case to court and the realistic risks and costs they face. Providing those issues are addressed then a competent mediator stands a very good chance of bringing favourable settlement terms to most disputes. Don’t knock it until you have tried it. And never say never.