The position with tenancies for high rents over £100,000 or more needs to be considered. The current position is rents over this sum are not protected by the Housing Act 1988, such tenancies cannot be Assured or Shorthold tenancies where the rent is above the high rent threshold. Therefore current tenancies with annual rents over £100,000 are exempt from the statutory protections of The Housing Act 1988. They are considered as common law tenancies governed by the terms of contract and common law requirements. The exemption is there as such tenants are deemed sophisticated consumers who do not need statutory protection and who can afford to obtain legal advice. Therefore, these tenancies being exempt, fall outside the reform to Assured tenancies in the Renters’ Rights Bill.

However the Government could of course increase the high rent threshold bringing tenancies with high rents into the reformed assured tenancy regime.

Historically, the threshold was increased in 2010 from £25,000 to £100,000 to reflect rising inflation and changing market conditions. The increase in the annual threshold therefore, meant many more tenancies were then protected by the Housing Act legislation. Clearly rents have risen once again, 15 years having elapsed since the last review. Therefore, we could see that the threshold is raised once again.

These higher rent tenancies would then fall within the scope of the Renters’ Rights Bill which means landlords are restricted on rent increase and rent review clauses and landlords would be subject to statutory procedures for rent changes, tenancy renewals and evictions. Grounds for possession would be required before serving Notices to Quit and compliance would be needed with the Deposit Protection Rules, registering on the private rented sector database and with the private rented sector landlord ombudsman and of course repairing obligations to meet standards under the Decent Homes Standards and AWAAB’s law.

Although only a small number of tenancies will be affected if the threshold raised from £100,000, it would affect landlords, requiring them to follow the increased regulation.

It does appear that the market is re-setting due to the Government’s proposed changes and it remains to be seen whether we will have an active and profitable rental market following November’s budget.

To find out more, please contact the Residential Real Estate team. 

What is a Lasting Power of Attorney?

A Lasting Power of Attorney is a legal document allowing someone you trust (your attorney) to make decisions for you. In property and financial matters, this includes signing contracts, completing sales, or buying a home. An LPA must be registered with the Office of the Public Guardian before it can be used. Once registered, it remains valid until revoked or until the donor passes away.

Can You Buy or Sell a Property Using an LPA?

Yes, this is a common scenario. For example, you may need to sell a parent’s home if they have moved into care, or you might be living abroad and want someone in the UK to handle the purchase of your new house. The key is that the LPA must be properly registered and give the attorney clear authority to deal with property and land.

How to Prove an LPA is Valid – Getting an Access Code

The Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) offers an online service that makes it quicker and easier to prove an LPA is valid. The donor or attorney can request a secure access code at www.gov.uk/view-lpa. This code can then be shared with organisations such as banks, solicitors, or care providers, who can view a digital summary of the registered LPA.

While the access code is a useful tool for many organisations, HM Land Registry still requires a certified copy of the LPA to be lodged with applications. This is because the Registry must hold documentary evidence on file and cannot rely solely on the online summary.

For attorneys, it is still sensible to request an access code in advance, as it can speed up checks with other organisations involved in the transaction. However, when registering a property transfer or mortgage, a certified copy of the LPA must still be provided to Land Registry.

What Does HM Land Registry Need?

When an attorney signs a transfer deed, mortgage, or other legal document, the Land Registry will usually ask to see the registered LPA (or a certified copy). If the LPA is more than a year old, they may also want confirmation that it has not been revoked. If anything is missing or unclear, the Land Registry may raise queries, potentially delaying the transaction.

What About Jointly Owned Property?

If the property is jointly owned, the rules can be more complex. A sole attorney cannot always give a valid receipt for the sale proceeds, so in some cases, more than one attorney or a trustee may need to be involved. Getting this right is crucial to avoid problems later on.

What If the Donor Has Lost Capacity?

One of the main benefits of an LPA is that it can still be used if the donor loses mental capacity. Provided the LPA is registered and valid, the attorney can complete the transaction. Buyers and lenders are also protected if they rely in good faith on a registered LPA, meaning the purchase remains secure even if issues with the document come to light later.

How We Can Help

Using an LPA in property transactions requires careful handling, but with the right legal advice, the process can run smoothly. Our Residential Property team regularly advises attorneys and families on sales and purchases involving a Power of Attorney. Whether you are selling a parent’s house under an LPA or buying a home while living abroad, we can guide you every step of the way.

Although the Land Registry has existed for many years, a surprising number of properties across England and Wales remain unregistered, especially where ownership has not changed hands for generations. If your home or land is unregistered, proving ownership depends entirely on old title deeds, which can create risks and complications.

What Does “Unregistered” Mean?

When a property is registered, HM Land Registry holds an official, digital record of who owns it, together with details of mortgages, rights of way, and covenants affecting the land. This register is secure, up-to-date, and easily accessible.

In contrast, an unregistered property has no such official record. Ownership is established only through original paper deeds and documents, sometimes going back decades. These papers must show an unbroken chain of ownership to prove a valid title.

Why Registration Matters

Registering your property offers several important advantages:

1. Protection against fraud
   Sadly, property fraud is on the rise. Fraudsters may attempt to pose as the owner of unregistered land and sell or mortgage it without your knowledge. Registration makes it much harder, as HM Land Registry has robust checks and safeguards in place.

2. Clear proof of ownership
   If you want to sell, remortgage, or transfer ownership in the future, having your title registered makes the process far simpler and more secure.

3. Avoiding lost or damaged deeds
   If the original title deeds are lost, damaged, or incomplete, proving ownership of unregistered land can beome costly and time-consuming. Registering your property now removes this risk.

4. Certainty about boundaries and rights
   A Land Registry title plan shows the general boundaries of your property and records key rights, restrictions, and covenants. This clarity reduces the risk of disputes with neighbours and helps future buyers understand exactly what they are purchasing.

5. Speed and efficiency in transactions
   Registered land is easier to sell or mortgage. Buyers, lenders, and solicitors can rely on Land Registry records, so transactions proceed more smoothly and with fewer delays.

 

Voluntary Registration

Registration of unregistered property is compulsory when it is sold, mortgaged, or gifted. However, you do not have to wait until then. You can choose to register your property voluntarily at any time, and benefit from a more streamlined process.

How We Can Help

Our Residential Property team can guide you through the registration process from start to finish. We will review your deeds, prepare the necessary application, and liaise with HM Land Registry on your behalf. Once registration is complete, you will receive an official copy of your registered title – clear, secure proof that you are the legal owner.

Registering now gives you peace of mind and makes any future property transactions far simpler.

 

Sherrards’ Real Estate Litigation and Residential teams worked together to help our client to get vacant possession.

Vacant possession means the property must be empty on the day you complete your purchase or sale of it. 

The £5million property in Kensington had been sold subject to contract, however, there was a tenant in the property who was refusing to leave which was jeopardising the sale.

Proceedings were issued in the High Court.

The team worked hand in hand with our Residential Real Estate department in order to provide vacant possession and a successful outcome for our client and the sale of their property.

Being connected to the internet is something we almost take for granted these days. Tenants looking to move into new premises are likely to assume that adequate connections will already be available or reasonably straightforward to set up.  This isn’t necessarily the case and before you find yourself unable to get your business up and running in your new premises, check out the position as you may need to enter into a wayleave agreement.  It is worthwhile doing this and getting the landlord involved as soon as you can.

While modern buildings should have fibre optic cabling installed, older buildings may not. Having connection at a level and speed required for business purposes may mean entering into a telecom agreement (a wayleave agreement) with the service provider for the installation, or upgrading, of cabling within the building.  This can take time and involve multiple parties.

While tenants should have rights to connect into existing service media in the building in their lease, this may not extend to new cabling.  This may mean seeking the consent of the landlord to run cabling through common parts of the building. The telecoms provider will also want to know they can access and maintain their kit once installed and connected.

A wayleave agreement or telecoms lease will usually need to be entered into between the tenant, the service provider and the landlord. The landlord will want to be involved in the process to protect their position as far as possible to ensure that the service provider only has the rights they are entitled to and the landlord can control as best they can removal of the kit from their building when required.

Landlords should be aware that telecommunications providers have statutory rights which are heavily weighted in their favour. It can take over 18 months to secure the removal of telecommunications apparatus from premises with the landlord needing to prove grounds to do so.  Operators are also allowed to assign their rights, upgrade the equipment or share with other providers without the landlord’s consent.

Before refurbishing or redeveloping a property in the medium to long term, a landlord will need to factor in the rights of telecoms providers within the building if their equipment is to be removed. There need to be adequate ‘lift and shift’ provisions in place in any wayleave or telecommunications lease to require providers to move the equipment to allow the landlord to refurbish the premises. 

To find out more contact law@sherrards.com 

The High Court in, Kettel and others v Bloomfold Ltd [2012] EWHC 1422 (Ch) granted an injunction to a group of tenants in a block of flats preventing the landlord from developing land where the tenants’ car parking spaces were located.  The Court ruled that the car parking spaces granted to the tenants as part of their long leases were easements and the tenants were entitled to an injunction preventing the landlord from carrying on the proposed development because the landlord was not entitled to unilaterally terminate the easements.

An easement is a right to use or pass over land, and not a right to possession or joint use of the land with the party that has granted the easement.  In addition, an easement cannot be claimed if its effect would be to deprive the party that has granted the easement the benefits of owning the land.  In other words, the right will not be an easement if it prevents the owner of the land in question having any reasonable use of the land.

The Tenants had been granted long leases of flats in the landlord’s existing development, which included a right to use a specific parking space.  In the leases, the landlord had reserved the right to develop its neighbouring property, even if this affected certain rights enjoyed by the tenants.  The landlord wanted to commence a new development on land which included the car parking spaces allotted to the tenants and required the tenants to accept different parking spaces elsewhere.

The Tenants sought an injunction to prevent the development, arguing that they had been granted rights to use the car parking spaces which amounted to exclusive possession, and which in turn deprived the landlord of all reasonable use of the land on which the car parking spaces were situated.  The landlord argued in return that the tenants did not have exclusive possession of the car parking spaces, and so the rights to use the car parking spaces were easements.  Therefore, the landlord further argued, if the proposed development deprived the tenants of their right to use the car parking spaces, the tenants should be awarded damages.

The High Court granted the injunction to the tenants.  The Court held that the tenants had not been granted exclusive possession of the car parking spaces and that the rights granted merely prevented the landlord from parking a car in the car parking spaces.  It did not prevent the landlord from doing anything else with the land, such as passing over it or laying pipes or service media beneath it for the existing block of flats.  Therefore, the landlord was left with reasonable use of the land.  However, there was no right set out in the tenants’ leases for the landlord to unilaterally vary the position of the car parking spaces.  In other words, the landlord could not on its own extinguish the easements that had been granted by granting equivalent easements to the tenants on a separate piece of land.  The landlord was entitled to temporarily obstruct the car parking spaces to carry out its maintenance obligations at the existing block of flats, but it could not extinguish the easement by requiring the tenants to park their cars elsewhere.  The Court therefore granted the injunction as an appropriate means of preventing the landlord from unilaterally terminating the easements, and the landlord was prevented from carrying out its proposed development.

This case confirms that where tenants are granted specific parking spaces within their lease, do have a legal entitlement to use the parking space.  Therefore, developers in granting new leases will need to consider and include a right to alter and indeed terminate the tenants parking rights, where there is a potential for development of that land further in the future.

To find out more, please contact Caroline Vernon. 

In recent years, there has been a surge in articles produced on Japanese Knotweed, a highly invasive and fast growing bamboo-like plant which seems to be haunting many gardens in Britain. It was introduced to the UK in the 1820s for its ornamental qualities but has since proved to be a hot topic as it is extremley costly for landowners and developers, causing structural damage, growing between concrete and blocking drainage systems. It is nearly impossible to eradicate and requires professional Japanese Knotweed contractors who have access to very powerful weed killers.

It has now reached the point where those affected by Knotweed are applying to the courts for compensation. The latest position adopted by the courts is to provide compensation in circumstances where there has been a loss of amenity but not where homeowners claim diminution in value.

This position follows a case that has been widely circulated in the news – Williams & Waistell v Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd. In 2017, two adjoining bungalow owners brought a claim against Network Rail for allowing knotweed to spread from the railway land up to the boundary and under their properties. The knotweed had not caused any physical damage to the bungalows so there was no basis for a claim in that sense. However, the bungalow owners alleged it had caused the properties to suffer a diminution in value and had stigmatised them. Mortgage lenders are very careful and are hesitant to lend on such properties.

The pair claimed that the presence of the knotweed had encroached on their properties, interfering with their quiet enjoyment and causing a loss of amenity by reducing market value. The judge found that Network Rail’s breach of duty and failure to properly manage the situation once they had become aware of the risks, had led to damage and continuing nuisance. The court awarded each claimant £10,000 for diminution of value and £4,320 for treating the knotweed to prevent further ingress.

Network Rail sought to challenge this decision at the Court of Appeal. The original judgment was upheld but it is important to highlight that the Court of Appeal based their decisions on different reasons to those given by the judge last year. The court determined that the parties affected could not succeed in a claim solely for private nuisance as a result of diminution in value. They could, however, be successful in a claim for nuisance caused by encroachment of the knotweed because of a reduced ability to enjoy the amenity of their respective properties.

To find out more information, click here to contact Paul Marmor.