Question 1
Issue
The issue is what clauses and keywords need to be included by Solentside Investments on their rent value.
Law
The law clauses applicable to Solentside Investments on its lease plan with a rent review would consist of the security for the tenants. One key clause to include in this case is Landlord, and the Tenant Act, approved in 1954 (Legislation.gov.uk, n.d.). The law would require Solentside Investments to consider the security of tenants’ clause. In this clause, Solentside Investments need to understand the protection of the tenants on their rents. The security, in this case, requires the tenants with long tenancies to get security for their low rents. The other clause applicable in this case is the willing Landlord and willing Tenant. In this clause, there is the inclusion of the market rent as set out by the RICS standards. The case of Solentside Investments would consider the rent as set in the market by the Redbook global standards. Moreover, there is also another clause which is section 34 disregards contained in the Tenant Act of 1954 (Legislation.gov.uk, n.d.). In this clause, Solentside Investments would also apply it to understanding the relevant laws on rent review. Additionally, there is also an occupation clause which considers whether Solentside Investments would review the rent for the already occupied building by the tenants. The other clauses which would also be included for this industrial estate are improvement and Goodwill.
Application
The first clause that needs to be applied in the case of Solentside Investments is the tenant and landlord Act of 1954. The clause would be important to determine whether the tenants would be protected by the security requirements in this clause. Solentside Investments would consider the duration of the tenants in these industrial premises before considering the rent review. The reason is that the clause requires the tenants to be protected specifically when they have lived for a long time on the premises. In such cases, where the tenants have lived for a long time, it would be difficult for Solentside Investments to apply for a rent review for five years. Moreover, the Tenant and willing Landlord clause would enable Solentside Investments to review the rent in relation to the market value. The instance would create fair ground for both the Tenant and Solentside Investments. The reason is that Solentside Investments would have to follow the existing standards for the rent to achieve fairness in the review process. The other considerable clause which would be applied in this case of Solentside Investments is the occupation clause. The clause considers the Landlord to review only when there is a vacancy. Therefore, it would be hard for Solentside Investments to review the rent when a tenant is occupying the industrial estate. The reason is that the clause is very clear when the Tenant is applicable. Moreover, there is another clause known as the improvement in which Solentside Investments would review the rent in case a necessary extension would require review. Therefore, the Tenant in this Solentside Investments would be required to pay and settle the improvements within the five years of review would have them. Even when there is no inclusion of the improvement in the lease, there would be a higher ability to review the rent.
Conclusion
Solentside Investments must consider applying the necessary clauses and review the rent after the five years mentioned. The improvement clause would give Solentside Investments the authority to review the rent even if it were not included during the leasing time. Moreover, Solentside Investments would apply willing Landlord and willing Tenant to review the rent specifically by allowing the market values to set up the rent. In this case, the standard in the market is set by the Redbook Global Validation Standards and would help Solentside Investments. However, the only challenge that would be for Solentside Investments is the security of the tenants. Generally, it would be easy for Solentside Investments to review the rent using improvement, Tenant willing and Landlord willing, and the market rent value standard.
Question 2: Solentside Investments
Issue
The issue is whether the Landlord would possess the site for redevelopment purposes and whether there would be payable compensation.
Law
One of the laws to be applied by Solentside Investments is the setting out under section 30, which considers grounds for redevelopment possession (RICS, 2019). The second section is 25, which is notice form (2), where the Landlord might serve hostile notice. According to existing laws, the notice should be given to the clients under a period of not less than 12 to 6 months. Therefore, Solentside Investments need to consider serving the tenants’ notice according to the provision of the law. For the case of compensation, the client would need to make informed changes by considering lease time. For instance, if the lease is less than 14 years, the compensation is 1 X RV and 2X RV for all leases above 14 years. The Landlord should also consider serving the client with section 40 (1) and determine the Tenant under the occupation of the place requiring redevelopment. Security of tenure rights would be considered when there are no tenants under the occupation of the said building. Lastly, the Landlord must use section 146 LPA Act and gain possession based on forfeiture.
Applications
In this case, Solentside Investments would need to consider getting notice and informing the tenants on time. Failure to serve the tenants with the notice. However, the notice might also be served, and the clients fail to adhere to it when the Landlord does not have any planning for the redevelopment process. Solentside Investments should also present the company proceedings regarding the redevelopment plans for the places occupied by the tenants. Applying the law of not in occupation, the Landlord would gain possession and redevelop the premises as planned. However, if the tenants are inside the building, there is a need to offer 12 to 6 months’ notice before possessing the premises for redevelopment purposes. The Landlord, in this case, Solentside Investments, should consider serving the tenants with another notice and know who is in occupation of the place or building requiring redevelopment. In terms of compensation, Solentside Investments would compensate tenants whose lease is under 14 years in 1 X RV. On the other hand, Solentside Investments would need to compensate the tenants with above 14 years lease on 2 X RV (Rollits, 2018). Generally, this would enable Solentside Investments to repossess the building and carry out relevant redevelopment.
Conclusion
Solentside Investments would be advised to follow the relevant laws before trying to repossess and redevelop the site. First, there is a need to consider serving the tenants with hostile notice as of 24th March 2023. The instance would offer the tenants enough time to comply and allow the site to be redeveloped. Moreover, Solentside Investments would need to have a ready plan for the redevelopment and present it to the tenants with relevant company proceedings related to the same issue. After issuing the tenants relevant notice, Solentside Investments would be repossessed and redeveloped. For the case of compensation, Solentside Investments would consider the years leased to the tenants. Generally, Solentside Investments needs to offer notice as of 24th March 2023. The notice would make it possible for Solentside Investments to repossess the site and carry out redevelopment.
Question 3: Solentside Investments
Issues
One of the issues is whether Solentside Investments would enforce repair charges on two blocks. The second issue is whether Solentside Investments would enforce FRI and IRO, which have tenants and who is to insure the building.
Law
The law established under the Leasehold Property Act 1938 applies to cases where landlords want to impose repairs (Legislation.gov.uk, n.d.). The other clause is the notice served to the tenants. The other applicable law is change over time, as outlined in section 146 (Legislation.gov.uk, n.d.). Using these two laws would help understand whether IRO and FRI would be applied to the Solentside Investments.
Applications
Solentside Investments need to repair windows for the business park. According to the Leasehold Property Act 1938, the enforcement would be allowed to consider enforcing IRO. Section 46 requires enforcement of repairs for essential lease currency. Therefore, Solentside Investments must conform to this section to enforce the IRO. Moreover, the other requirement would be for Solentside Investments to conform to the Law Property Act of 1925. In this case, there is a need to get the relevant FRI for the Solentside Investments and gain the relevant right to enforce the repair charges. The two clauses need to follow the two laws and increase the ability of Solentside Investments to repair the window. In the case of insurance, it would not be the tenants to pay but the Landlord. The Landlord would be the one to pay for the insurance in the window repair and later claim the money. The reclaim would result from the insurance rent specified in the service or lease charges. It would be good for Solentside Investments to insure the building and reclaim all the involved charges. The reason is that the tenants would fall at risk if they consider insuring the building. Therefore, there is a need for the Solentside Investments to first conform to the two identified laws before enforcing IRO and FRI.
Conclusion
Solentside Investments would need to enforce these repair charges for the window only if they conform to section 46 of the Leasehold property Act and the Property Act of 1925. With these two laws, it would be easy for Solentside Investments to acquire the relevant IRO and FRI enforcement. However, the insurance would be paid by the Landlord, who, in this case, is Solentside Investments. The insurance would require the Landlord to reclaim later the charges used in the repair of the window. The repairs would be made through the service offered to the tenants. The most important thing before the Landlord, Solentside Investments enforces these regulations would be the idea of conforming to the two Acts as indicated in the law. The instance would make it possible for the Landlord to enforce the IRO and FRI.
References
Legislation.gov.uk. (n.d.). Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/2-3/56/part/I/crossheading/security-of-tenure-for-tenants-under-ground-leases-etc
Legislation.gov.uk. (n.d.). Law of Property Act 1925. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5/15-16/20/section/146
Legislation.gov.uk. (n.d.). Leasehold Property (Repairs) Act 1938. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/1-2/34/section/1
RICS. (2019). Redevelopment: lease renewal. https://www.isurv.com/info/390/features/11839/redevelopment_lease_renewal
Rollits. (2018). Commercial Tenant’s compensation for loss of leasehold premises. https://www.rollits.com/news/articles/commercial-tenants-compensation-for-loss-of-leasehold-premises/
write