• 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 / Advice Case Study Disasters / Southwark litigant-in-person leaseholder faces wipe-out after £24,000 tribunal victory. Council now deploys ‘shock and awe’ QC …

Southwark litigant-in-person leaseholder faces wipe-out after £24,000 tribunal victory. Council now deploys ‘shock and awe’ QC …

October 30, 2018 //  by Sebastian O'Kelly

Michelle Baharier Philip Rainey QC
Michelle Barharier, 55, a disabled artist and litigant in person, won her argument against £24,000 service charges against Southwark Council, but now faces a ‘shock and awe’ onslaught from a leading landlord and tenant QC

A  Southwark Council litigant-in-person leaseholder will lose her home after the council has decided to deploy a top legal team to reverse her £24,486 tribunal victory in the First Tier Tribunal.

Artist Michelle Baharier, 55, who is registered as disabled, declined to pay the bill to install a new communal boiler and heating system at Gilesmead in Camberwell. She successfully persuaded the First Tier Tribunal last year that the system it was an enhancement to what existed, not a repair, and was therefore not payable under the lease.

On this occasion, the property tribunal functioned as it originally intended as a low cost adjudication, with the council making its case with housing staff.

After its defeat, however, it has now engaged the services of Philip Rainey QC, with a hearing in the Upper Tribunal on December 11.

As the action began in the county court, it will determine costs, which in the event of defeat could mean the loss of Miss Baharier’s home.

The Leasehold Knowledge Partnership has urged Southwark Council to hold a meeting to mediate the dispute, involving housing staff and her MP Harriet Harman.

The alternative is the possibility of another Southwark Council leaseholder car crash in the courts, and possible additional expense if Miss Baharier is rendered homeless.

In 2014, LKP reported the disastrous litigation of Southwark Council leaseholder Farieda Chandoo, a former nanny of ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne. Miss Chandoo has debts of around £110,000 after fighting and losing a £40,000 major works dispute with Southwark Council.

George Osborne’s former nanny faces £100,000 bills and loss of home

Miss Baharier’s dispute concerned a £1 million refurbishment of the communal heating system at Gilesmean, a site of 40 flats built in the 1960s.

Miss Baharier has lived in her flat since 1991, buying it under right-to-buy in 2008. Owing to the refurbishment, she now has four radiators and a large and intrusive hot water tank, which has been fitted into the sitting room of the two-bedroom flat.

The tribunal ruling (below) pondered at length the distinction between a “repair” to the existing system, or an “improvement”. This has been a crucial issue in several landmark section 20 cases.

Michelle Baharier is not overjoyed to have an intrusive heating system in her flat, which has taken up significant acreage in her two-bed property. She also has quotes showing that four radiators and a boiler would have cost rather less than £24,000

Miss Baharier, who was assisted by the Citizens Advice Bureau, argued strongly that three individual contractors has estimated to fit a new boiler and four radiators in her flat, with £4,799 being the most expensive quote.

However, a communal boiler system is a more expensive prospect.

The tribunal concluded that Southwark Council had correctly consulted over the works.

But it concluded that Miss Baharier did not have to pay the £24,486.88p service charge.

It did warn, however, that it had no jurisdiction over how a county court might award costs.

In view of the fact that Miss Baharier sought justice from the property tribunal, and obtained it in her favour, it is wrong that she should now either gamble on an unequal bout against a QC which could leave her homeless. Or meekly surrender.

The irony is that Southwark Council loses either way: if Miss Baharier wins in the Upper Tribunal it will have wasted a lot of money on an expensive legal team. If it wins, it will end up having to rehouse one of its former council tenants who exercised the right to buy.

In July, Jim Fitzpatrick MP, a patron of LKP, told Parliament that the property tribunal “stinks” and lets down leaseholders repeatedly.

Parliament told the Property Tribunal ‘stinks’: it lets down leaseholders again and again

Tribunal ruling for Michelle Baharier: 17.08.2017 Judgement from First Tier Tribunal – LON-00BE-LSC-2017-0092

Related posts:

Lawyers offer pro bono aid to leaseholder facing QC in £24,000 dispute in Upper Tribunal Southwark council leaseholders see major works bill slashed from £17,000 to £8,000 Southwark MeetingSouthwark hosts meeting of 350 council leaseholders Helen Hayes leaseholdSouthwark announces new bills … and no funds for leaseholder group George Osborne’s former nanny faces £100,000 bill and homelessness after refusing to pay major works on her leasehold ex-council flat

Category: Advice Case Study Disasters, Local authority leasehold, News, Philip Rainey QC, Property tribunalTag: Harriet Harman MP, Major works, Michelle Baharier, Philip Rainey QC, Property tribunal, Section 20, Southwark Council

Latest Tweets

Tweets by @LKPleasehold

Mentions

Anthony Essien (34) APPG (37) ARMA (87) Bellway (30) Benjamin Mire (32) Cladding scandal (71) Clive Betts MP (31) CMA (45) Commonhold (52) Competition and Markets Authority (41) Countryside Properties plc (33) FirstPort (42) Grenfell cladding (56) Ground rents (54) Harry Scoffin (150) James Brokenshire MP (31) Jim Fitzpatrick (35) Jim Fitzpatrick MP (30) Justin Bates (40) Justin Madders MP (67) Katie Kendrick (37) Law Commission (60) LEASE (66) Leasehold Advisory Service (62) Leasehold houses (32) Long Harbour (48) Martin Boyd (80) McCarthy and Stone (39) National Leasehold Campaign (38) Persimmon (49) Peverel (61) Property tribunal (49) Redrow (30) Retirement (37) Robert Jenrick (33) Roger Southam (47) Sajid Javid (38) Sebastian O’Kelly (55) Sir Peter Bottomley (201) Taylor Wimpey (106) Tchenguiz (33) The Guardian (33) The Times (31) Vincent Tchenguiz (43) Waking watch contracts (40)
Previous Post: « LKP London meeting for leaseholders November 10
Next Post: Anger at Law Commission meetings in offices of freeholders’ solicitors »

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Paddy

    October 30, 2018 at 8:31 pm

    There are so many comments that come to mind, not all favourable to one side, but none will lighten the trauma.

    Except one.

    Where else other than in English residential leasehold could it cost an occupier TWENTY FOUR THOUSAND quid for a heating system for a TWO BED flat?

    Seriously? This was the best deal?

    S20 is surely meaningless in this regard?

    Would Mr Brokenshire et al expect to pay this for a heating system in a 2 bed flat?

    Was no study undertaken as to any other alternative than a communal system?

    I hear modern compact combi systems pump out 25 kWhs and need little in pipework infrastructure – not even a tank.

    I am mystified. But I am old.

  2. Paddy

    October 30, 2018 at 9:33 pm

    As I asked… para 20 of the FTT decision reveals:-

    “The landlord…decided…to consult further with leaseholders regarding the possible installation of individual boilers in place of a communal heating system.”

    Excellent.

    And?

    Did the leaseholders knock back the idea of individual boilers in each flat?

    A story’s impact is the whole story?

    • stephen

      October 31, 2018 at 9:37 am

      The council should have appreciated that the heating system was antiquated and that a new type of heating system, presumably a great deal more efficient should have been proposed

      It should equally have realised that £25,000 per lessee was going to be a very confrontational and have also appreciated that it was going to be challenged.

      It is possible that cheaper works would not have been permissible under the lease as they are improvement .It should therefore have engaged in an open dialogue with the lessees and once having gained their opinion then made an application to the FTT for clearance and if necessary a change in the lease to enable the works to go ahead and for recovery of the charges. As Paddy says no explanation is given in para 20 as to why the process started and then became derailed.

      One can only hope that the savings in heating costs the lessee should make will defray the costs of borrowing the sum (presumably from the council) to pay for the works.

  3. Bryan Wildman

    October 31, 2018 at 8:51 am

    Interesting to note the name of the QC engaged.

  4. Michael Epstein

    October 31, 2018 at 3:47 pm

    One can only hope Stephen? One can only hope from the Stephen who defends leasehold? The very same Stephen who argues that if it is in the lease the leaseholder should abide by the lease, lest there is a breach of freeholder’s human rights?
    The tribunal is trumpeted as a low cost arbitrator of disputes Indeed great store is set by the tribunal by those seeking to militate on behalf of the leasehold system.
    This is yet another case that proves this to be a sham!
    A leaseholder can go to the tribunal and win, but if it doesn’t suit the freeholder with deep pockets they simply rock up at a court with highly specialised barristers charging huge amounts and beat a poor leaseholder into submission.
    Southark council have form in this matter. I seem to recollect a scandal involving a roof replacement(that turned out not to be needed) for which a lady sadly could not cope with the stress with tragic consequences for her and her family.

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.

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 © 2023 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