Top Tweets for #section20

Wouldn’t it be better to have an independent body overseeing Section 20 works - deciding whether they’re actually needed, whether the costs are fair, and how much should sit with the freeholder - rather than leaving it to what can feel like stitched-up little freeholder fiefdoms? Short answer: yes. Longer answer: the current system pretends to do this… but only after the damage is done. Under Section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the "checks" are consultation (they ask, you respond… they still decide - rolleyes), a vague "reasonableness" test, and the option to challenge at the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber). On paper, that’s oversight. In reality, it’s reactive - and the burden sits with leaseholders to fight it after the bill lands. What’s missing is simple: independent pre-approval. Imagine if major works had to be signed off in advance, costed properly, causes examined, and apportionment fairly set, before anyone gets invoiced. Because right now, the system assumes the freeholder is acting reasonably… and only questions it if you can afford to prove otherwise against an asymmetric system. Consultation in its present form is just theatre if the bill lands regardless.

The High Court today rejected Freeholders’ bid to overturn legislation effectively barring them from demanding excessive payments for ‘ground rents’ or lease extensions which otherwise make leaseholders investments worthless. Sanity & fairness have won! https://t.co/wfYcX34W38