Dewar Hogan Solicitors

22/01/2025

The Renters (Reform) Bill will introduce changes in relation to those cases where landlords rely on arrears of rent as a ground of possession. Although rent-related grounds are mandatory grounds, the Bill requires compliance with provisions that will complicate and delay a claim for possession.

Stay informed about how these reforms could affect landlords and managing agents.

Read more here -

As we anticipate the demise of the s.21 process, probably within the next few months, many landlords in the residential sector may be reassuring themselves that it will still be straightforward to end a tenancy where the tenant falls into rent arrears. Unfortunately, the Renters Rights Bill looks se...

19/09/2024

For our observations on how much longer landlords will be able to use S.21 notices to terminate existing AST tenancies, potential problems, and the position regarding new tenancies please see our latest blog: https://tinyurl.com/yyw66x8v

If you’d like to discuss ASTs and in particular termination issues, please don’t hesitate to contact us: 020 7832 6410

13/09/2024

Like most markets the legal services market is complex. Clients entering the market may benefit from guidance not only in relation to their choice of solicitor but also in relation to fee structures and agreements – of which there are many. For further comments on the market and fee agreements please see our latest blog: https://shorturl.at/yUdrm

If you'd like to discuss these topics, please don't hesitate to contact us: 020 7832 6410.

04/09/2024

Experience shows that the perception of some clients about disputes and litigation is very different from the perception of most litigation lawyers. Clients may see it as an immediate process. They may not see “litigation” as a series of stages, during which decisions can be made about the direction and pace of a dispute, including the decision to settle. Many clients will say to themselves “I have a small six figure claim, but I’ve been told it will cost more than that to get to trial, and if I lose I’ll have to pay my opponent’s costs. It’s not worth pursuing.” While the lawyer will acknowledge that it could cost a great deal to get to trial he will appreciate that the process is gradual rather than immediate, that most disputes settle, and that his client’s opponent will have the same concerns as his client.

In broad terms there are three stages in the life of a dispute. The first is for the client’s lawyer to review the client’s case, or such of it as is apparent from his instructions and the client’s documents. If it’s hopeless the case may end there. The client will have received unwelcome but hopefully useful advice.

On the other hand the case may appear to be strong, or at least arguable. If it is then in most cases the next stage is for the lawyer to make representations to his client’s opponent with a view to resolving the dispute. The first two stages don’t involve court proceedings. The client is responsible for his own costs, but he is not exposed to adverse costs. During this period, the parties may decide to mediate or use some other technique to try to resolve their differences. In short during the first two stages the court is not involved. The parties are free to negotiate or not, and if there is no settlement it’s a matter for the claimant to decide whether to move to the third stage – to take proceedings – or to take no further action.

Court proceedings change the position in two significant ways: the intervention of court rules and orders (particularly in relation to time limits), but probably of greater significance to the parties is the risk of paying adverse costs. Although the stakes are higher it is still likely that there will be a settlement rather than a trial, but costs may be more of an issue, which may make settlement more difficult to achieve than at an earlier stage.

If you’re navigating a dispute and need expert guidance through each stage, contact us today to explore your options and make informed decisions. https://dewarhogan.co.uk/contact-us/

29/07/2024

The King’s Speech on 17 July re-affirmed the government’s commitment to ending no-fault evictions. It also informed us that the Renters Rights Bill will include provisions ‘reforming grounds for possession’. That seems ambiguous as to whether the plan is to introduce new grounds for serving notice under section 8, or perhaps just change, possibly reduce, the existing grounds. A little more clarification is provided by the briefing notes to the speech, which explain that in the Renters Rights Bill ‘new clear and expanded possession grounds will be introduced’; it’s not a guarantee that the existing grounds will be left untouched but suggests that at least some of the new grounds discussed in the context of the last government’s bill are still on the cards. It seems likely that these will include a provision specific to lettings to students, in order to promote an adequate supply of student accommodation at the start of each academic year. It’s more doubtful whether a new ground for possession where the landlord wants to sell will still be introduced. If it is, it may now be subject to limitations such as a requirement for the landlord to make a statement of truth, and a prohibition on re-letting for a period after possession is obtained. These provisions would reflect the limitations and caveats Labour sought to introduce to the Renters Reform Bill, but it is quite possible that as the party in government they will go further, and simply dispense with any new ground for possession based on desire to sell.

Neither the speech nor the briefing notes having anything to say about when we’ll see a draft bill, although the repeated references to immediate action suggest that this will not be long. In any event, as the government has been very clear that the abolition of s.21 notices will not wait on court reform, we can be confident that, as bad as the court delays are now, they will only be getting worse over the coming months. Landlords concerned about finding themselves locked into tenancies on more restrictive terms than they anticipated would be well advised to act quickly.

Contact Dewar Hogan for advice and representation in relation to S.21 notices, claims for possession, and navigating a claim through the county court.
https://dewarhogan.co.uk/contact-us/

24/07/2024

Just because a property is held in the name of a particular person does not mean that he or she is the real owner of the property.

Real ownership (in legal language often referred to as beneficial ownership) may differ from formal or nominal ownership. A property may be held in someone’s name but be really owned by somebody else. This is the basis of the idea of a trust. There are many reasons why someone may choose to hold property in a way which obscures the real ownership of an asset. In some cases the motive may not be at all suspicious: it may just be a matter of convenience – particularly in a family context. The presumption, or starting point, in any enquiry about real ownership is that the formal owner is the real owner. Another presumption is that the real owner is the person who paid for the property. But these presumptions only assist in knowing where to start. They do not necessarily indicate the outcome of an enquiry. It should be remembered that the function of legal presumptions is to make good a lack of evidence. In the end it is the facts, if proved by the evidence, that will decide the real ownership of property.

The question at the heart of any enquiry about the real ownership of property is the intentions of the parties when the property was acquired. If there is a written agreement (eg a declaration of trust) then, in the absence of fraud, that may well put an end of the matter. However, in many cases (including family cases) there will be no such agreement. If it is alleged that there is an oral agreement, the court will need to determine whether there was one, and if so what it was. Other possibilities, including whether a tacit agreement can be inferred from the conduct of the parties.

Contact Dewar Hogan for advice about claims for beneficial interests, options for funding legal costs, and protection against adverse costs.

https://dewarhogan.co.uk/contact-us/

17/07/2024

Many dilapidations claims made on the termination of a lease have a habit of generating irregular and/or interminable correspondence between surveyors with occasional, but usually empty, threats of litigation by the landlord’s surveyor. Apart from a slight saving in costs is there any point in dealing with a claim in this way when the Dilapidations Protocol provides a very focused framework for making a claim? If the claim is reasonably substantial the answer is probably no. A letter written at the right time in accordance with the Protocol should, together with a schedule of dilapidations, and a threat of proceedings, send a strong and clear message to the tenant - one that should prompt a serious negotiation. After all, unless a landlord’s claim is likely to fail because of a diminution issue, he should be reasonably confident of recovering damages and costs.

This approach also works well if the landlord’s solicitors are prepared to work on a contingency basis – of which there are a number of possibilities – and to share with the landlord the risks associated with making a claim. As the law stands, mediation is almost inevitable; and in most cases mediation will result in a settlement. In theory at least, if a landlord can engage the attention of his tenant by the disciplined approach of the Protocol (including maintaining momentum) it ought to be possible to settle a claim, either by direct negotiation or mediation.

Contact Dewar Hogan for advice on pursuing or contesting a claim in respect of dilapidations, and costs funding options: https://dewarhogan.co.uk/contact-us/

09/07/2024

Break clauses can be found in commercial leases and residential tenancy agreements. They give the party with the benefit of the clause the opportunity to bring a lease or agreement to an end earlier than otherwise. As such they represent a valuable right. However, to avoid traps and uncertainty a break clause needs to be considered carefully both at the drafting stage and when the right is about to be exercised. Acceptance by a tenant of a landlord’s wording may result in a tenant paying more rent than expected on exercising the right to break. Conditional break clauses are common, and the important point here, particularly for tenants, is that the Court takes a strict view of compliance. Examples of common conditions include the payment rent, compliance with other obligations, and delivering vacant possession. Failure to comply with a condition will usually invalidate a break notice. These are important points for both the parties to a lease or tenancy agreement and also, in relation to landlords, their asset managers and property managers.

To avoid traps and to be on the right side of the argument contact us to learn how we can help: https://dewarhogan.co.uk/contact-us/

03/07/2024

UK off-plan developments may not be as popular as they were a few years ago but they generate the same sorts of claims and disputes. There are two sorts of claims that we still see on fairly regular basis. The first, are claims for the return of deposits against developers in difficulty. The second are claims in negligence against investors’ solicitors for either failing to advise adequately on risk, or for failing to obtain for an investor, priority over a charge created after the date of the contract between an investor and a developer. With regard to the later, many of the claims we’ve dealt with have been group claims that have settled before or shortly after the commencement of proceedings.

If you are an investor, or you represent a group of investors, facing these sorts of issues don’t hesitate to contact us.

Get in touch: https://dewarhogan.co.uk/contact-us/

01/07/2024

The Labour Party’s election manifesto says that they intend to abolish the s.21 possession procedure (the landlord’s right to terminate an assured shorthold tenancy by giving two months’ notice) ‘immediately.’

What does ‘immediately’ mean in this context? It has been suggested that a new Labour government might use ‘Covid-era powers’ to end the use of s.21 notices without needing to pass primary legislation. As it’s hard to see how ‘no fault’ evictions could be classed as a public health issue, that seems unlikely. More probably, the term ‘immediately’ is intended to contrast with the public perception that the now defunct Renters Reform Bill postponed the ‘ban’ on s.21 notices indefinitely. In fact, that bill provided for s.21 notices to become unavailable to new tenancies (including new periodic tenancies arising at the end of a fixed term) six months from the Bill being enacted. The delay pending court reforms was therefore only set to apply to existing periodic tenancies. Now, allowing for a new Act dealing with this issue, it is doubtful that ‘immediately’ will turn out to mean ‘before the end of 2024’.

Nevertheless, it seems increasingly likely that the abolition of s.21 will not be much later than that and ‘immediately’ may well mean that when it is effected, it will be without the six-month implementation warning for new tenancies, and quite possibly without a grace period for existing tenancies either. It also seems likely that few measures extending the grounds for a s.8 possession notice will now be introduced and there is concern in some quarters that the new legislation might apply to tenancies where a section 21 notice has already been served, or even where a possession order has already been made but not yet enforced.

If you are thinking of terminating an assured shorthold tenancy and would like to discuss your plans, don’t hesitate to contact us: https://dewarhogan.co.uk/contact-us/

27/06/2024

The appointment of receivers by secured lenders is a popular remedy, and is one that often has serious adverse consequences for a borrower. Residential borrowers will have more statutory protection than commercial borrowers, but in either case a borrower should make every effort to avoid the appointment of receivers.

In the event of an appointment two problems come to mind. In terms of communications, the borrower may no longer be able to speak to their existing contacts at the lender. They will have to deal with a team whose priority is the recovery of the debt; and the receivers will probably have the same single-minded approach.

The other problem is that a receivership is expensive, and all the costs – and there are many – will be added to the security. Receivership should be avoided and paying for professional representation is probably money well spent.

Facing receivership? Protect your interests with our expert advice. Contact our team: https://dewarhogan.co.uk/contact-us/

19/06/2024

Understandably, some owners of residential flats think that as they own their flats, they can alter them as they see fit. This is probably because they have not paid much attention to their Leases. If they had they would have realised that some alterations require landlord’s consent and, in any event, that they are not entitled to interfere with the exterior of the building.

This sort of lack of understanding can lead to tension and disputes between landlords and tenants. We can advise landlords and tenants on their rights and their remedies.

Avoid disputes and understand your rights as a landlord or tenant by getting in touch with our team: https://dewarhogan.co.uk/contact-us/