Consent to dispose

As you will be aware, the Tenant Services Authority has concluded its consultation on standards for Registered Providers and has issued a new consent for disposals which came into force on 1 April 2010. This consent supercedes the General Consent 1992 and 2008 issued by the Housing Corporation.

Click here to link to the consent.

To find out more, please contact Graham Phillips

Recovery of contractual costs in residential possession proceedings

Costs recoverable by a landlord in an undefended residential possession action based solely on arrears of rent are fixed. The court however has discretion to allow a landlord to recover greater 'contractual' costs if the tenancy agreement contains an appropriate indemnity clause, for example 'the tenant agrees to indemnify the landlord in respect of all actions, claims and liabilities'.  This is confirmed by case law. It must be emphasised, however, that costs must have been reasonably incurred, be reasonable in amount and the specific indemnity clause pleaded. All landlords should check their tenancy agreements to ensure they contain such an express term to enable them to claim their costs in full.

To find out more, please contact Jonathan Rouse

The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) came into force on 6 April 2010

The good news for Registered Providers is that the regulations have an exemption from CIL where a development comprises 'qualifying dwellings'.  That is defined as dwellings made available by a Registered Provider for either letting or disposal under a shared ownership arrangement.
Registered Providers do not have any exemption from liability for section 106 contributions.  It may therefore be a financial benefit to Registered Providers where a local authority decides to implement and charge CIL.  However, research has been carried out which indicates that fewer than 50% of local authorities are intending to implement the CIL regime.  With the election now set for 6 May, and the Conservative Party having indicated that it will abolish CIL, the position is going to remain uncertain for some time yet.

To find out more, please contact Tim Davies

What's that up your sleeve?

The Court of Appeal has held that a tenant who kept a compensation claim for disrepair 'up his sleeve' during negotiations to settle a possession claim against him, should not have the claim struck out as an abuse of process, even though he could have raised the claim as a part of his defence to the possession proceedings. The central question was not whether he could have raised the disrepair, but whether he should have.

However desirable it may be for a party to bring all his claims in one go, a claim should not be barred simply because someone fails to raise it when he could have done so. The facts must be such that the second action amounts to an abuse of process. The consent order in question spelled out the extent to which the agreement was to shut out any further claims and the other party should have been alive to the possibility of such a claim being raised when bringing the possession proceedings.

Henley v Bloom (2010)

To find out more, please contact Colin Hammond