Taken from the Lease Advice Government website (http://www.lease-advice.org/publications/documents/document.asp?item=21)
We have then removed the errors and taken out sections on areas of the 2002 Act which are not workable. An example of this might be the suggestion that all properties be visited. As most lessees live at their property, this is unnecessary advice.
The Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 provides a right for lessees (flat owners) to transfer the landlord’s right to manage or appoint a manager for their building, to a company set up by lessees called a right to manage company.
The right to manage is available to leaseholders of flats, not of houses. If the complex is mixed, it is likely that the blocks of flats within the complex may go through the process whilst the houses may not.
The process is relatively simple. The landlord’s consent is not required, nor is any order of the court. There is no need for the leaseholders to show or prove bad management by the landlord or his agent.
The right is exercised by the service of a particular legal notice on the landlord. After a set period of time, the management transfers to the right to manage company which has been set up for the purpose. Once the right to manage has been acquired, the landlord is entitled to membership of the company.
Canonbury Management take care of the entire right to manage claim process for you so many of the questions and issues in this document, taken from the Lease website, are not necessary if you use our services.
Perhaps the very first consideration should be what the lease-holders want to achieve by taking over the management of the building.
Clearly, it makes sense for the leaseholders to take general control of the upkeep of their flats but to do so will bring with it duties and liabilities. In acquiring the power to make approvals and to enforce the covenants of the leases, the leaseholders become responsible for decision-making in terms of permissions and management, although, if you appoint a management company, these problems will be taken care of by them.
Whatever the motivation for starting the right to manage process, there are a number of basic issues which should be considered prior to taking any action.
At its most basic, the right to manage is simply a transfer of responsibility and decision-making. There is only a transfer in the practical day-to-day management of the building if the RTM company decides there should be. In most cases, you will want to remove the existing management company which has been the cause of your problems and put in place a new company. Lease-holders should not be tempted to view RTM as a route to DIY management, which, like all DIY projects, tends to go wrong. Self management is only advisable if the block is less than 6 flats.
Unless the building is small (less than 6 flats) the management is best left to a professional managing agent. Management is a job which requires certain high-level legal, accounting and property-specific skills and experience and is a responsible role for which insurance and legal protections are necessary.
One of the major motivations for the right to manage may be to save money on maintenance and repair works. While this is a sensible objective, the RTM company must adopt a responsible attitude to the long-term maintenance aspects. The building still belongs to the freeholder. The RTM company cannot save money by reducing essential services or by allowing the block to deteriorate. The covenants in the lease (which will not be changed in the exercise of the right) should specify service provision and require the property to be maintained as it becomes necessary, not when convenient. Where they do not so specify what is required, a good, prudent, common-sense approach is best and the RTM Company should look first to improve service and then to reduce costs.
The RTM company will be required, like any other landlord, to comply with a code of practice for block management. At present, the only code of practice used by the courts is the Residential Management Code produced by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS). While compliance with the code is not mandatory, failure to do so is one of the grounds for an application to the First Tier Property Tribunal to appoint a new manager or to end the right to manage. Canonbury Management exceed this code by a long way in their leadership of the Block Management industry.
Taking over the management will bring responsibilities and it is important to consider these at an early stage:
The building must meet certain conditions and a minimum number of leaseholders is required to take part.
* A ‘qualifying tenant’ is a leaseholder whose lease was originally granted for an original term of more than 21 years. There is no requirement for any past or present residence in the flats, nor any limit on the number of flats which can be owned by one person.
The right to manage may only be exercised by a right to manage company and the members of the RTM company must comprise a sufficient number of qualifying tenants. The required minimum number of qualifying tenants must be equal to at least 50% of the flats in the block. Canonbury have an eligibility tester on their site for checking this.
The right relates to a building, so, in an estate of separate blocks, each block would need to qualify separately and an individual RTM notice served. This is due to the way in which Parliament has drafted the Memorandum and Articles of the RTM Company, which must be used. In the case of an estate of flats under the same management, it would be sensible to take over the management of the whole estate, but this would have to be accomplished by application in respect of each separate block and you may be best advised to do this in a piecemeal fashion.
The right to manage is exercised by the company, not by the individual leaseholders, and so cannot be put into practice without the formation of the company. It is the company which obtains the right to manage and which then takes responsibility for the management. The individual leaseholders may change over time, but the company remains in place.
The RTM company must be set up and run in accordance with statutory requirements. It must be a company limited by guarantee and registered with the Registrar of Companies at Companies House. It must have a Memorandum and Articles of Association which govern the purpose and running of the company. These documents are prescribed by law, within the 2002 Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act and you are advised to use a professional formation agent, such as Canonbury Management to ensure these documents are correctly produced.
The prescribed Memorandum and Articles of Association are set out in Statutory Instrument (2003 No 2120), obtainable from The UK Statute Database online.
Forming the RTM company is a relatively simple operation and is best done by a company formation agent.
Any number of qualifying leaseholders may set up the RTM company. It does not require the full number of participants at this initial stage but simply enough participants to provide the statutory minimum of one member.
You will also need to appoint Directors and Company Secretary, however, there are 3rd parties who will fulfil these roles in a nominal way, that is, will not make decisions but will act as nominees throughout the legal process.
Once the RTM company has been registered, with its original members, it must then formally invite the rest of the qualifying leaseholders to join except if they have given express commitment to becoming members already in which case, they are just added to the register of members.
All qualifying leaseholders are entitled to become members of the RTM company. No-one may be excluded for any reason. It is also important to remember that, once the right to manage has been acquired, the landlord is also entitled to membership of the company. The Notice Inviting Participation must be in writing and in the prescribed form and must be served on all qualifying leaseholders who are not, at the time of service, members of the RTM company or who have not already agreed to be members. As you will see below, it is complex and you are advised to use a professional company to send out the notices. It must:
The prescribed form is set out in a Statutory Instrument (2003 No 1988) obtainable from The UK Statute Database online
The notice must be served by a method prescribed under section 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules which usually means by first class post or in person, on the landlord at the address shown on HM Land Registry or if a different address has been provided by the landlord or his agent for service (sometimes with the service charge bills) to that address.
The procedure of service of the Notice Inviting Participation is important. Firstly, the legislation requires that all of the leaseholders should have the opportunity to take part in the exercise of RTM. However, the adequacy or otherwise of the procedure may provide an opportunity to the landlord to challenge the eventual action of obtaining RTM on the basis that the RTM company is not properly constituted, in that it failed to comply with the service of the notices. Therefore, you should make sure that a competent company is used for the Right to Manage process.
All of those qualifying leaseholders who respond to the notice and who ask for membership must be enrolled as members of the RTM company and the membership noted in the register of members, which is usually an electronic document and does not have to be registered.
Although the RTM company is now legally equipped to proceed, it may be unwise to do so without some detailed investigation into the present management arrangements and the implications for the company of taking on the management, however, be wise to the fact that usually, the management company will not provide this information. The legislation provides rights both to information from the landlord and access for inspection of the premises, however, it may be the case that management companies will not respond to such requests and a court order may be needed. For that reason, we would advise the appointment of professional managers who will take care of these issues.
The management of any but the smallest building can be complicated and for large buildings, or estates, can be comparable to the management of a sizeable business. The RTM company should not be tempted to start the process of taking over the management without a clear idea of what is involved.
Information requirements will vary for each building. In the case of larger buildings, it may be prudent to obtain professional advice from a managing agent or surveyor on what is required. The following is suggested:
Landlord and Tenant legislation – you are entitled to obtain details of the name and address of your landlord under rights provided by the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The information, if requested, must be provided within 21 days and failure to so provide is an offence although you must realise that this does not always oblige managers to comply.
The same Act provides a right to an annual statement of the service charge account for the building and for investigation of the documents, receipts and other information on which the charges are based. Most good companies will show this data online, if you are a lessee.
Land Registry – as long as the property is registered, you can look online at the HM Land Registry which will provide most of the information you require.
Information notice – Section 82 of the 2002 Act provides a right for the RTM company to serve a notice on the landlord requiring any information ‘which the company reasonably requires for ascertaining the particulars to be included in a claim notice for claiming the right to acquire the right to manage’. The wording is quite precise – the power is to require information sufficient to serve the claim notice. It is not a general power to obtain information other than for this purpose. Where the required information is contained in ‘documents’, for example, accounts or bank statements, contracts or specifications, the notice can require the landlord to allow access for inspection and copying of documents or to supply a copy of the document. A landlord served with a notice under Section 82 must comply within 28 days, however, this will not always happen.
Section 83 provides a right of access, after service of the Notice of Claim, however, usually, you will have access to your own building.
The legislation does not require the RTM company to produce, or submit to the landlord, any form of business plan or budget, nor to provide any information as to how the company proposes to manage the building. The Notice Inviting Participation requires a statement of whether the company proposes to self-manage or to appoint professional management, but there is no statutory requirement for employment of a manager, or for any prior management experience by the company – there are, after all, no such requirements for landlords. As with all things, you are usually better off using a professional company than trying to do the complex work yourselves.
It is sensible to consider the employment of a managing agent and to look at the costs of this and the service delivery objectives that could be achieved. The members of the RTM company should, if possible, speak to a small number of agents but if they have experience of a good company, this may not be necessary.
It should be remembered that, although the management passes to the leaseholders’ company, no ownership passes and all leases remain unaltered. Thus the fabric of the building remains in the ownership of the landlord. The RTM company will have a duty to the landlord not to allow a depreciation in the value of the landlord’s interest through neglect, mismanagement or deliberate under spending on the building.
One of the first steps, for larger buildings, should be the calculation of a capital items budget to cover longer term works which are not part of every year’s expenditure. A good management company will do this as part of their work. Some now offer this online.
One of the continuing problems of the leasehold system is the difference in expectations and objectives between the landlord and the leaseholders. For the landlord, the building is usually a long-term investment. On the other hand, many leaseholders view their ownership of the flats as short term – they may have no long-term view and wish to limit their short-term costs.
It must be a prerequisite of the acquisition of the right to manage that the RTM company will manage the building sensibly, in accordance with the terms of the lease or preferably, outsources this to a professional company.
The claim may only be exercised where:
The claim may not be served until 14 days after the service of the Notice Inviting Participation.
The right is exercised by service on the landlord of a Notice of Claim. There is no requirement to prove default or bad management by the landlord, and there is no requirement for approval by a court. The Notice of Claim must be served on:
The form for the Notice of Claim is prescribed and it must be in writing and must:
The regulations require the inclusion of three further points:
The prescribed form for the Notice of Claim is set out in the Statutory Instrument (2003 No 1988) and you are advised to use a professional company to send out the claim notices.
It is this Notice of Claim which brings the exercise of the right to manage into being and sets the date for the RTM company to take over the management. In being able to set their own date, the members of the RTM company are in a position to plan ahead and to prepare for the transfer.
If the landlord, or any of the other parties to the lease on whom the notice of claim must be served, cannot be found, this will not present an obstacle to exercise of the right. The notice is served in the usual manner.
As mentioned earlier, there is a statutory right (Section 83 of the 2002 Act) for the RTM company to require access to ‘any part of the premises if that is reasonable’ in connection with the claim, however, as lessees, you will usually have access to the building in any case. This is a right to inspect areas and facilities not generally accessible to the leaseholders. The right provides for access to ‘any person authorised to act for the RTM company’. The right may be exercised by giving not less than ten days notice. There is no prescribed form for the notice.
Unlike the request for information, which can be served at any time, this right is only available after service of the Notice of Claim.
We would advise you appoint a professional company to undertake an inspection of the building. The new managing agent may be able to do this as part of their package for a small sum.
The equivalent right is also available to the landlord and to other recipients of the Notice of Claim who may require access to the flats in the building, at the same period of notice.
No later than the date specified by the RTM company in the Notice of Claim, the landlord(s) may serve a counter-notice. The counter-notice can do one of two things: either agree to the RTM or to allege reasons why the RTM company is not entitled to proceed. The counter-notice does not provide an opportunity to raise queries or to dispute the RTM on any other ground.
The counter-notice must be in the prescribed form and is limited to one of the two following statements:
Where the landlord does not serve a counter-notice, then the acquisition date for the right will be the date specified in the notice. The LVT have no jurisdiction to hear cases where no counter notice has been received. The right will have transferred automatically.
Where the landlord disputes the claim, the grounds for dispute are limited to:
The Tribunal determines whether the RTM company is or is not entitled to the right to manage. There is a right of appeal to the Lands Tribunal, by leave of the LVT or the Lands Tribunal.
The RTM company must reimburse the landlord for any reasonable costs he has incurred in the process. There is, perhaps, need for constant reminder that the right is not default-based and may be exercised against the best or most competent landlords. There is, therefore, no justification for the landlord to suffer any financial loss from the process (other than any subsequent loss of management fees).
The Act refers to costs ‘in respect of professional services’ for which the landlord was ‘personally liable’. This may generally be taken to mean the landlord’s reasonable legal expenses in dealing with the notice, any accountancy or audit costs arising from provision of accounts or transfer of monies and the costs of his solicitor or managing agent in the hand-over of management records and functions. The landlord cannot recover any costs of an LVT hearing on entitlement to RTM, except where the Tribunal finds against the RTM company. The costs are only recoverable by the landlord to the extent that they are ‘reasonable’ and, where the costs are disputed, either party may apply to the LVT for a determination of what shall be considered reasonable.
Costs are still recoverable if the RTM does not proceed, for example, if the claim notice is withdrawn by the company, or deemed to be withdrawn, if the RTM company is wound up or if the LVT determines that the company is not entitled to acquire the right. It must be appreciated that the liability for the landlord’s costs extends to all members of the RTM company. The liability for costs of an unsuccessful application cannot be avoided by winding up the company.
There is no prescribed form, but an application form is available from the LVT.
The acquisition date is the date on which the RTM company formally takes control of the management from the landlord:
However, before the company takes over there are a number of other steps to be dealt with.
Immediately upon the RTM company taking over on the acquisition date, the landlord becomes entitled to membership of the company, with full voting rights as a company member . The landlord’s votes are, in the first instance, determined according to the units he holds in the building, flats or non-residential parts. In cases where he holds no units, and therefore would have no votes, he is allocated one vote as the landlord.
As the right to manage is not default-based, there is no reason why the landlord, who retains an interest in the building, should not have some input to the practicalities of its management. With the right to manage, it is assumed that the landlord is not necessarily at fault and so there is no justification for his exclusion from the management process.
The right is not limited to the immediate landlord, but includes any intermediate landlords under the lease. For example, the landlords may comprise the freeholder plus the head lessee, or the freehold may be split in its ownership and the two or more owners of the split freehold will be entitled both to membership of the company and to a vote.
However, there is no danger of multiple landlords being able to out-number the flat-owners’ votes. The votes will be allocated pro-rata to the number of landlords. For example, if there are a number of intermediate interests in a building which results in, say, five landlord members, then each flat-owner would be allocated five votes to reflect this or the landlord would be issued with 0.20 votes.
The landlord has voting rights in respect of each unit he holds. The units may be flats let on periodic tenancies, the caretaker’s flat or any non-residential units. Where the landlord does not hold any units in the building he simply has one vote, as the landlord. This is best illustrated by example:
A block of 20 flats, 16 of the flats are leasehold, four of the flats are held by the landlord and let by him on shorthold tenancies. In this case, the 16 leaseholders may be members of the RTM company with one vote each, the landlord has one vote as flat-owner for each of his four flats. Thus he has four votes in total.
Again, a block of 20 flats, but in this example there is not only a freeholder, but also a head-lessee who holds four of the flats. In this case, there are two landlords entitled to membership. The votes would be weighted to reflect the two landlords, with two votes being allocated to each of the flats. Now the lease-holders have 16 x 2 = 32 votes. The freeholder has no direct control of any of units in the building so has the default position of one vote as a landlord, plus the head-lessee also has two votes in respect of each of his retained flats. Therefore the landlords’ total votes are 1 + 8 = 9. The alternative would be that the freeholder would have 4.5 votes and the leaseholders 16 votes.
Where there are commercial units, the landlord retains a single vote per commercial unit.
The votes allocated in respect of the non-residential parts will be proportional to the relative internal floor areas of the residential and non-residential parts of the building, excluding the common parts. Again, this requires an example.
If there is a dispute on the measurement of the floor areas, the prescribed Articles of Association provide for this to be referred to an independent chartered surveyor. The surveyor will act as an expert, not an arbitrator, and his decision, based on his own measurement, will be final and binding upon the RTM company. The surveyor should be selected by agreement between the parties or, if this is not possible, by the President of the RICS; his fees will be payable by the RTM company, but the surveyor has the discretion to direct that some or all of his fee be reimbursed by the individual member(s) of the RTM company who raised the initial question.
The landlord will probably have a number of contracts in place relating to the building. It is important that the RTM company is aware of them and that the relevant contractors are given adequate warning of the impending transfer of management. Contracts may be with the managing agent for the overall management of the building, for the maintenance of the lift, the boilers and central heating, the door-entry system, for cleaning, gardening, caretaking or other direct services, or for the provision of supplies.
Because all responsibility for management passes to the RTM company, the landlord will no longer be able to fulfil his part of the contract and the RTM company will need to make decisions on whether to renew the contracts or to look elsewhere for the service(s).
It is extremely important that steps are taken in good time to ensure the continuity of management services; it would be very unfortunate, for example, if someone were trapped in the lift on the day of hand-over and the RTM company did not have the lift maintenance contract in place.
It is the landlord’s duty to ensure that parties are aware of the contracts through the service of the contractor notices and the contract notices, however, it is unlikely in reality that you will receive these.
This must be served on all contractors appointed by the landlord and include the following information:
This must be served on the RTM company and include the following information:
Both the contract and contractor notices should be served by the landlord as soon as possible after he receives the Notice of Claim from the RTM company, but no later than ‘as soon as is reasonably practicable’ after the determination date. This is enforceable through the county courts, however, in reality, it will rarely be economic to take this route.
The determination date is the date specified in the Notice of Claim for the service of the landlord’s counter-notice, or, if the claim is disputed by landlord, the final date of the determination by the LVT, or the date of any subsequent agreement by the landlord.
Because there is a gap of three months between the determination date and the acquisition date, the notices should be served well before the management is transferred.
Ideally, a well-organised RTM company would already have obtained these details at a much earlier stage and have made important decisions on retaining or obtaining new contractors. However, it must not be assumed that all existing contractors will necessarily be prepared to contract with the RTM company, and the company should investigate alternative providers. Because an existing contract is broken by the process, it gives the company the opportunity to review contracted services to the building and to re-specify or re-negotiate accordingly.
The RTM company will not be able to manage the building without detailed information and records and the company may require the landlord to provide whatever the company ‘reasonably requires in connection with the exercise of the right to manage’. This is a different provision from the request for information. Whereas the earlier right required information for the purpose of serving the Notice of Claim, this right is for information necessary for the management of the building. As with the earlier comments on requests for information, the company must be quite clear on its requirements and it may be prudent to obtain professional advice.
While the landlord has a statutory obligation to provide the information requested, he is not obliged to volunteer information and the company must be clear and precise in its notice to him. The company may require sight and inspection of documents, or copies of them – for example, contracts, the accounts for the building and the service charges, any proposals or specifications for future works, maintenance schedules etc.
Where the company is appointing a new managing agent, then the new agent will be able to advise on the information and records to be obtained.
The notice may be served on the landlord at any time, but he is not obliged to act on it before the acquisition date. He must comply within 28 days of service of the notice, but cannot be compelled to do so before the acquisition date.
For example, if the RTM company serves the notice on the acquisition date, the landlord must comply within 28 days of the notice. If the notice is served, say, 20 days before the acquisition date, the landlord must comply within 8 days of the acquisition date.
This timing allows the landlord sufficient time to assemble the information but does not require him to release potentially sensitive or confidential material before the RTM company actually takes over the management. In that the RTM company needs the information from the first day of taking up management, the general intention of the provision is that the company should serve the notice at least 28 days before the acquisition date with a view to the landlord providing the information on, or immediately after, the acquisition date.
Delaying service of the notice until the acquisition date could create a difficult situation. The company would not be able to manage fully without proper information, but a landlord could, quite legally, delay its provision until 28 days after the company takes over.
A reasonable landlord will be concerned with maintaining proper management of what remains his long-term asset – the property – and will provide the required information and records in due time. However, in other cases, arrangements must be put in place to ensure continuity of management without the information during the notice period, or for a longer period if the landlord fails to comply and the matter has to be referred to the court for enforcement. This is, again, an area where a professional managing agent will be able to advise.
Where the landlord has collected service charges in advance but not yet spent them all and is holding the remainder in a trust account, he is under an obligation to hand over all the unspent sums to the RTM company. These will not only include unspent service charges but also any reserve account or sinking fund. This does not require a notice from the RTM company. The legislation requires the landlord to act and to make a payment to the RTM company equal to those uncommitted sums held by him on the acquisition date or ‘as soon after that date as is reasonably practicable’.
The amount to be paid is the sum of:
The RTM company is not required to have any capital, so it may be important to gain control of these funds as soon as possible in order to maintain service provision to the leaseholders of the building.
The Act provides that an application may be made to the First Tier Property Tribunal to determine the amount to be paid. Some landlords may simply rely on the LVT to fix the sum. Other landlords may pay what they consider appropriate, only to find the RTM company challenging this through the Tribunal. It may be sensible, in all cases, for the RTM company and the landlord to agree to an external audit of the service charge accounts and for the RTM company to cover the costs of this. An audit will ensure fair play for the RTM company and provide surety for any agent of the landlord. It is most unlikely that a managing agent acting for the landlord would be prepared to take responsibility for handing over sums to the RTM company without some independent verification, nor could he reasonably be expected to.
In cases of dispute, the LVT provides a final route for determination, but this should not be considered the first port of call – the Tribunal is under constant pressure and determinations inevitably take time.
As with the provision of information, the RTM company will be in a difficult position if the hand-over of monies is delayed; it may be sensible to anticipate such a delay and to make some other financial provision for the first few months of operation, for example, by the members of the RTM company making a special contribution or by the company seeking a loan. Alternatively, the landlord may be prepared to make a partial payment on account, subject to a final agreement later.
There is no prescribed form for application to the LVT for determination of uncommitted service charges, but a suitable form, with explanatory notes for completion, is available from the LVT.
On the acquisition date, the RTM company takes over all of the management functions for the premises under the lease. Normally these will be the functions directly exercised by the landlord, but in some cases may have been delegated to another party to the leases or to a management company. However, no matter who is responsible for managing the property, the functions pass to the RTM company on the acquisition date.
‘Management functions’ are defined in the legislation as ‘functions with respect to services, repairs, maintenance, improvements, insurance and management’ – that is, the delivery of all the duties reserved to the landlord under the lease. Typically these will include:
The right to receive the ground rents does not pass to the RTM company but remains with the landlord. The landlord might, however, employ the RTM company’s managing agent to collect the ground rents for him.
If the building contains non-residential or commercial units, shops or offices, garages or storage not included in the leases, then the management of these parts remains the responsibility of the landlord. It is possible, however, that disputes may arise in consequence and there is no provision in the legislation to deal with this.
For example, access to the units may be shared with the common parts of the building under the control of the RTM company, or the landlord may have concerns about the effect of any neglect of the external appearance of the building by the RTM company on the value of the commercial lettings. In other cases, the signage for a shop may be affixed to the structure of the building which lies within the responsibility of the RTM company, and the company’s consent or co-operation required for its renewal.
All these cases will need to be resolved through sensible negotiation or, in the last resort, through arbitration or the court.
Where the landlord owns and lets flats in the building, other than on long leases, he will be responsible for the general management of the tenants of the flats but will be liable to the RTM company for the service charges on those flats. Where repairs need to be carried out, the landlord will be responsible for works within the flat, but where the repair relates to the structure of the building, this will generally be a matter for the RTM company.
This is a specific remedy of the landlord and cannot be exercised by the RTM company. Therefore, the RTM company cannot institute forfeiture proceedings in furtherance of recovery of arrears of service charges. If the arrears cannot be recovered through other means, the company will have to seek the co-operation of the landlord.
It is important to be clear as to the powers that are transferred. The day-to-day functions and responsibilities of the management of the building pass to the RTM company and, as a consequence, the original manager is no longer entitled to perform those functions. The landlord is still, however, the landlord under the lease and is therefore responsible for the performance of the landlord’s covenants outside the general duties of management, for example, for providing quiet enjoyment and rights of support of the flats.
In this context it should be emphasised that monies due to the landlord prior to the acquisition date, but yet not paid, remain payable to the landlord, and collectable by him, not the RTM company, however, it is normal practice for arrears to be passed to the new agent or RTM Company for collection.
Most leases contain provisions requiring the consent of the landlord to certain actions by the leaseholder; these can include sub-letting, assigning the lease and making alterations to the flat. The power to issue such approvals passes to the RTM company, although the company must keep the landlord informed. Before granting any such approval, the RTM company must give notice to the landlord:
There are no prescribed forms for application to the LVT for determination of the grant of an approval, but a suitable form, with explanatory notes for completion, is available from the LVT.
The leaseholders’ covenants, or obligations, under the lease become the responsibility of the RTM company; the company must ensure that all covenants are complied with and must keep the landlord informed. The company has a statutory duty to review all the leaseholders’ compliance with their covenants and to take steps requiring the remedy of any breaches. Any breaches which have not been remedied must be reported to the landlord (unless he has specifically notified the RTM company that it need not do so). The landlord then may proceed to enforce the covenant through the remedy of forfeiture.
Where the lease provides a right of access into the flats by the landlord for purposes of compliance or enforcement of covenants, this right is available to the RTM company.
The right to manage, once acquired, is not subject to any time limit and will continue until it is terminated; it is not subject to review by time.
There are three circumstances where the right may be terminated:
The procedures for an application under Part 2 of the 1987 Act are available from the LVT.
Where the right to manage is terminated, for any reason, no further application for the right may be made for another four years, other than with the consent of a First Tier Property Tribunal.
The prescribed Memorandum and Articles of Association of the RTM Company do not include in their wording the requirement for the list of members of the RTM Company, in the application for requisition of the Company, to be witnessed and dated. This is a requirement of the Companies Act and the Registrar of Companies will return all applications where the necessary witness signature and date are omitted, however, if you make use of a professional company who forms the RTM Company electronically, this is not required.
If you have any further questions or would like to register with our block management team please contact us by phone on 0754 781 5685 or by contacting us.