• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Before Header

  • Home
  • What is LKP
  • Find everything …
  • Contact
Donate

Leasehold Knowledge Management Logo

Secretariat of the All Party Parliamentary Group on leasehold reform

Mobile Menu

  • Home
  • What is LKP
  • Find everything …
  • Contact
  • Advice
  • News
    • Find everything …
    • About Peverel group
    • APPG
    • ARMA
    • Bellway
    • Benjamin Mire
    • Brixton Hill Court
    • Canary Riverside
    • Charter Quay
    • Chelsea Bridge Wharf
    • Cladding scandal
    • Competition and Markets Authority / OFT
    • Commonhold
    • Communities Select Committee
    • Conveyancing Association
    • Countrywide
    • MHCLG
    • E&J Capital Partners
    • Exit fees
    • FirstPort
    • Fleecehold
    • Forfeiture
    • FPRA
    • Gleeson Homes
    • Ground rent scandal
    • Hanover
    • House managers flat
    • House of Lords
    • Housing associations
    • Informal lease extension
    • Insurance
    • IRPM
    • JB Leitch
    • Jim Fitzpatrick MP
    • John Christodoulou
    • Justin Bates
    • Justin Madders MP
    • Law Commission
    • LEASE
    • Liam Spender
    • Local authority leasehold
    • London Assembly
    • Louie Burns
    • Martin Paine
    • McCarthy and Stone
    • Moskovitz / Gurvits
    • Mulberry Mews
    • National Leasehold Campaign
    • Oakland Court
    • Park Homes
    • Parliament
    • Persimmon
    • Peverel
    • Philip Rainey QC
    • Plantation Wharf
    • Press
    • Property tribunal
    • Prostitutes
    • Quadrangle House
    • Redrow
    • Retirement
    • Richard Davidoff
    • RICS
    • Right To Manage Federation
    • Roger Southam
    • Rooftop development
    • RTM
    • Sean Powell
    • SFO
    • Shared ownership
    • Sinclair Gardens Investments
    • Sir Ed Davey
    • Sir Peter Bottomley
    • St George’s Wharf
    • Subletting
    • Taylor Wimpey
    • Tchenguiz
    • Warwick Estates
    • West India Quay
    • William Waldorf Astor
    • Windrush Court
  • Parliament
  • Accreditation
  • [Custom]
Menu
  • Advice
  • News
      • Find everything …
      • About Peverel group
      • APPG
      • ARMA
      • Bellway
      • Benjamin Mire
      • Brixton Hill Court
      • Canary Riverside
      • Charter Quay
      • Chelsea Bridge Wharf
      • Cladding scandal
      • Competition and Markets Authority / OFT
      • Commonhold
      • Communities Select Committee
      • Conveyancing Association
      • Countrywide
      • MHCLG
      • E&J Capital Partners
      • Exit fees
      • FirstPort
      • Fleecehold
      • Forfeiture
      • FPRA
      • Gleeson Homes
      • Ground rent scandal
      • Hanover
      • House managers flat
      • House of Lords
      • Housing associations
      • Informal lease extension
      • Insurance
      • IRPM
      • JB Leitch
      • Jim Fitzpatrick MP
      • John Christodoulou
      • Justin Bates
      • Justin Madders MP
      • Law Commission
      • LEASE
      • Liam Spender
      • Local authority leasehold
      • London Assembly
      • Louie Burns
      • Martin Paine
      • McCarthy and Stone
      • Moskovitz / Gurvits
      • Mulberry Mews
      • National Leasehold Campaign
      • Oakland Court
      • Park Homes
      • Parliament
      • Persimmon
      • Peverel
      • Philip Rainey QC
      • Plantation Wharf
      • Press
      • Property tribunal
      • Prostitutes
      • Quadrangle House
      • Redrow
      • Retirement
      • Richard Davidoff
      • RICS
      • Right To Manage Federation
      • Roger Southam
      • Rooftop development
      • RTM
      • Sean Powell
      • SFO
      • Shared ownership
      • Sinclair Gardens Investments
      • Sir Ed Davey
      • Sir Peter Bottomley
      • St George’s Wharf
      • Subletting
      • Taylor Wimpey
      • Tchenguiz
      • Warwick Estates
      • West India Quay
      • William Waldorf Astor
      • Windrush Court
  • Parliament
  • Accreditation
You are here: Home / Latest News / Bristol leaseholders fail to win freeholds to their homes as one was not a house, in Covid-19 online court case

Bristol leaseholders fail to win freeholds to their homes as one was not a house, in Covid-19 online court case

April 8, 2020 //  by Sebastian O'Kelly

As it happens, one of these terraced houses in Bristol was not a house, for the purposes of the 1967 Act and therefore could not enfranchise: it had a tripartite lease and was more akin to a flat in a single building

In what is hopefully not an inauspicious ruling for leaseholders in over-the-web justice, 11 leasehold house owners have failed to win the right to buy the freehold to their homes.

Although they won their case in the property tribunal, the High Court accepted the landlord’s appeal that not all the houses were in fact single dwellings and therefore the leaseholders were not entitled to acquire the freeholds under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967.

The hearing was held via video-conference, rather than held at the Bristol Civil Justice Centre, and the judgement makes reference to “the appeal was conducted remotely over the internet … during the COVID-19 “coronavirus” pandemic”.

The reason the leaseholders failed was that one of the properties had a tripartite lease – with a landlord, management company and lessee, whose premises defined in the lease were not the whole house. It could more accurately be termed a flat, albeit in a single building.

This point had not been addressed in the lower court, but was accepted by Mr Justice Marcus Smith who upheld the appeal.

He said:

“Although in some respects finely balanced, I have reached the clear conclusion that the construction favoured by the Appellant is correct and that a tenant does not fall within the enfranchisement regime of the 1967 Act unless he or she is the tenant of substantially the whole of a leasehold house.”

The leaseholders were ordered to pay up the landlord’s £14,000 costs within 14 days.

The freehold owning entity in this case was Freehold Properties 250 Limited – whose directors are given by Companies House as Robert Steinhouse, Jennifer Jackson-Shilling and Stephen Whybrow.

On a side note, Robert Steinhouse, LKP readers may recall, is the freeholder who managed to offload for £1 the freehold of cladding site Nova House in Slough onto the council in an as yet unexplained deal.

Ground rent speculator Robert Steinhouse cuts and runs from Nova House, but who pays £4m Grenfell bill?

Freehold Properties 250 Ltd v Field & Ors [2020] EWHC 792 (Ch) (08 April 2020)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICEBUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES IN BRISTOLCHANCERY APPEALS (ChD) On the appeal from the order of Mr Recorder Norman dated 19 July 2019 sitting at the County Court at Bristol Mr Justice Marcus Smith: A.

Related posts:

Default ThumbnailShouldn’t this case have been dealt with by a more senior court than the ‘low-cost’ property tribunal? Default Thumbnail‘Our David Wilson Homes leasehold house means we don’t own it, or the land, pay ground rent and consent fees to anonymous speculators in freeholds, often based offshore,’ Cheshire woman tells local paper Court of Appeal turns down Mundy case – unanimously Mundy case in Court of Appeal showdown over valuation racket Court of Appeal to hear Mundy case which will save millions on lease extensions

Category: Latest News, NewsTag: Covid-19, Freehold Owners 250 Limited, Robert Steinhouse

Sign up to the LKP newsletter

Fill in the link here

Latest Tweets

Tweets by @LKPleasehold

Mentions

Anthony Essien (34) APPG (44) ARMA (91) Benjamin Mire (32) Cladding scandal (71) Clive Betts MP (33) CMA (46) Commonhold (55) Competition and Markets Authority (42) Countryside Properties plc (33) FirstPort (55) Grenfell cladding (56) Ground rents (55) Israel Moskovitz (32) James Brokenshire MP (31) Jim Fitzpatrick (36) Jim Fitzpatrick MP (31) Justin Bates (41) Justin Madders MP (75) Katie Kendrick (40) Law Commission (61) LEASE (68) Leasehold Advisory Service (65) Leasehold houses (32) Liam Spender (39) Long Harbour (51) Lord Greenhalgh (32) Martin Boyd (87) McCarthy and Stone (43) National Leasehold Campaign (42) Persimmon (49) Peverel (61) Property tribunal (49) Retirement (38) Robert Jenrick (33) Roger Southam (47) Sajid Javid (38) Sebastian O’Kelly (67) Sir Peter Bottomley (211) Taylor Wimpey (106) Tchenguiz (33) The Guardian (33) The Times (34) Vincent Tchenguiz (45) Waking watch contracts (40)
Previous Post: « Please sort out ‘waking watch’ yourselves owing to coronavirus, says freeholder of Circle 109, Liverpool
Next Post: APPG gains more new members Sarah Jones cladding»

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Stephen

    April 8, 2020 at 10:05 pm

    I am puzzled by your summary of the case which is headed up “Bristol Leaseholds win leasehold”

    I read the judgement and I quote the final part

    (2) The Respondents have no right to acquire the freehold of the Properties pursuant to section 1 of the Leasehold Reform Act 1967; and none of the Respondents are “a tenant of a leasehold house” in respect of the Property they have demised within the meaning of section 1(1) of

    (5) The Respondents are jointly and severally liable for the Appellant’s costs of this appeal, summarily assessed in the amount of £14,000 (inclusive of VAT), this sum to be paid by the Respondents within 14 days of the handing down of this Judgment

    .

    • Sebastian O'Kelly

      April 8, 2020 at 11:22 pm

      You are correct and the article has been amended.

  2. Simon

    April 9, 2020 at 8:44 am

    Very sad result, and highlights one of the main beneficiaries are lawyers who do well from the arcane complexity of leasehold. I hope when the dreadful virus situation is finished, that politicians and wider society realise that leasehold as presently constructed is a grossly unfair system we cannot afford to keep.

  3. Roger Jenking

    April 9, 2020 at 10:02 am

    I suppose the letter of the law was applied but the imposition of costs is gratuitous. I shall write to the judge. They shd be held accountable for their actions.

    • Stephen

      April 9, 2020 at 9:44 pm

      One positive thing this case illustrates is that video conference could be a way to deal with case management hearings and smaller disputes

      A directions hearing at say the FTT scheduled for 2:00 pm effectively writes off the whole day when travelling time is factored in

      Video cases would save significant time and money for all parties

      • Sebastian O'Kelly

        April 12, 2020 at 7:33 pm

        Yes, this is certainly the case.

        Hopefully it will lead to quicker and cheaper justice in the property tribunal, with the added bonus of creating modern, searchable rulings. (Not that that is a failing unique to the property tribunal.)

        Hopefully we will see the legal fees, which crept into the tribunal undermining its original purpose will be pushed back. Not that I would bet on that, sadly.

        Far too many tribunal cases against leaseholders are won with gaming the legal fees: far cheaper lawyers are engaged if there is a prospect of landlords not getting their legal costs (eg if leaseholders have obeyed LKP’s golden rule: pay first; fight second.)

Above Footer

Advising leaseholders. Avoiding disasters.
Stopping forfeiture. Exposing abuses. Urging reform.

We depend on individuals for the majority of our funding.

Support Us and Donate

LKP Managing Agents

Become an LKP Managing Agent

Common Ground
Adam Church
Blocnet property management2

Stay in Touch

To achieve victory in the leasehold game where you are playing against professionals and with rules that they know all too well - stay informed with the LKP newsletter.
Sign Up for Newsletter

Professional Directory

The following advertisements are from firms that seek business from leaseholders.
Click on the logos for company profiles.

Barry Passmore

Footer

About LKP

  • What is LKP
  • Privacy and data

Categories

  • News
  • Cladding scandal
  • Commonhold
  • Law Commission
  • Fleecehold
  • Parliament
  • Press
  • APPG

Contact

Leasehold Knowledge Partnership
Open Data Institute
5th Floor
Kings Place
London N1 9AG

sok@leaseholdknowledge.com

Copyright © 2025 Leasehold Knowledge Partnership | All rights reserved
Leasehold Knowledge Partnership Limited (company number: 08999652) is a company limited by guarantee that is a registered charity (number: 1162584) with the Charities Commission.
LKP website is hosted at www.34sp.com
Website by Callia Web