Damp cycle ride on a Saturday morning leads to Building Safety Act victory in Court of Appeal

The first challenge in the Court of Appeal to the Building Safety Act – and its associated costs – has resulted in a victory for the leaseholders.

Which is good news for the flat owners – mostly buy-to-letters – who had had £7,000 added to the service charge by the anonymous investors in Adriatic Land, £5,500 of them demanded after the relevant provisions of the BSA came into force.

Of course, Adriatic Land is back again in court next week for the judicial review saying the 2024 Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act infringes their human rights.

It was pretty touch and go whether the leaseholders would get this far.

Thanks to LKP mounting our luxury office vehicle – a bicycle – and a damp ride on a Saturday morning last January to Abbey Wood in remote south east London, we managed to inform the leaseholders – by distributing leaflets in the foyer – that a couple of lawyers were prepared to represent them for free in an appeal.

Solicitor Liam Spender, of Velitor Law, and an LKP trustee, offered his services as did barristers Hugh Rowan and Mark Loveday.

Rather to our surprise a leaflet was passed into the hands of one of the participating leaseholders in the dispute, and the message got out.

Mr Spender analyses the case here:

Court of Appeal success for Velitor’s pro bono clients

Velitor is proud to have represented 32 leaseholders of Hippersley Point in South East London. We have successfully resisted their freeholder’s attempt to charge them legal costs in relation to cladding works. On 8 July 2025, the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in favour of our clients in Adriatic Land 5 Limited v Long Leaseholders of Hippersley Point [2025] EWCA Civ 856.

The main issue is:

“Hippersley Point concerns the protections for qualifying leaseholders under Schedule 8 of the BSA. In particular, the provision prevents qualifying leaseholders from having to pay their landlord’s legal and other professional costs incurred in relation to remediation of safety defects. The decision is of wide importance because many of the leaseholder protections in Schedule 8 depend on similar wording to paragraph 9.”

Mr Spender, who is also organising class action on freeholders’ insurance commission, is quoted on the Velitor Law website saying:

“These decisions are of significant importance to leaseholders across England and Wales. In Hippersley Point the Court of Appeal has made clear that leaseholders facing demands for potentially tens of thousands that have not already been enforced will no longer have to pay.”

All of which is very good news.

It is rather less good news that the decision will almost certainly be taken to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Hopefully, other lawyers will take on the burden of representing the leaseholders, as Mr Spender and Mr Rowan and Mr Loveday have, perhaps, done enough.