What a clever idea of Wellcome Trust to use one of the City's most expensive law firms to squash an insolent leaseholder like a fly.
That should stop any other leaseholder getting uppity with the Trust.
It's always interesting how judges go hard on litigants in persons: after all, why not?
They have a vested interest in protecting their professional colleagues!
For those residents thinking of using Knight Frank to flog their home, they can relax knowing KF will drive a hard bargain!
That should stop any other leaseholder getting uppity with the Trust.
It's always interesting how judges go hard on litigants in persons: after all, why not?
They have a vested interest in protecting their professional colleagues!
For those residents thinking of using Knight Frank to flog their home, they can relax knowing KF will drive a hard bargain!
The Wellcome Trust spent £114,000 to defeat a leaseholder in Onslow Square in Kensington over a £6,000 dispute – which came down from £8,247 originally demanded.
The gargantuan bill includes VAT.
The case means that the woman leaseholder will have to sell her home, it is claimed, but the Wellcome Trust has not to date pressed for forfeiture.
The Wellcome Trust – the world’s second largest charity ($27 billion) after the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – tells LKP that it is “working to resolve this matter”, adding: “We are not in a position to make any further comment as we are bound by a non-disclosure agreement.”
The Wellcome Trusts legal bills were racked up at a property tribunal that ruled in September 2016, although the dispute is still smouldering on, with LKP copied into correspondence over this matter.
These are also directed at the Wellcome Trust chair Eliza Manningham-Buller, the former director general of the internal intelligence service MI5.
 |
| GIVE US THE DOSH, MANNINGHAM-BULLY |
The leaseholder was a litigant in person, while the Wellcome Trust Limited deployed a barrister with a case prepared by leading solicitors CMS Cameron McKenna LLP.
Knight Frank managed the building, and there were other professional witnesses.
Knight Frank managed the building, and there were other professional witnesses.
Pretty bold to suggest judges are corrupt and do favours for mates!
ReplyDeleteThis type of David and Goliath tactic launched by wealthy, institutional, landlords against leaseholders of modest means is not uncommon. The Kensington and Chelsea TMO behaved in a similarly despicable way when I, along with 3 other leaseholders in Elm Park Gardens,took the Council to the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal in 2007. There was a time when Local Authority landlords and managing agents set an example to their private sector counterparts; but alas no more. The Leasehold Valuation Tribunal roundly condemned the TMO referring to the situation being 'entirely of the Council's making" as well as deploring the lack of co-operation on the part of the TMO. Sir Merrick Cockell, Councillor for Stanley Ward at the time, did little of practical significance about this situation. The TMO then went from bad to worse with 71 people losing their lives.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the story here? What was the argument about?
ReplyDeleteThe Dame is getting too lazy to tell the story! Silly old bag
DeleteThe Dame is 'vacationing' on her fazenda and is entitled to a little respite.
DeleteThe crux of the story is that Wellcome Trust used its wealth to destroy an impoverished leaseholder.
How dare you accuse her of indolence when she devotes every moment of her life fighting injustice. You should be ashamed of yourself, sir or madam.
Full article:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.leaseholdknowledge.com/wellcome-trust-spends-114000-on-lawyers-to-defeat-onslow-square-leaseholder-in-6000-dispute
A different story in the full version!
ReplyDeleteThe real story is that between them Savills and Wellcome Trust so terrify leaseholders that none dare challenge them and risk bankruptcy.
ReplyDeleteThe Hornet has chapter and verse on the tactics used by Wellcome and their gofers, Savills, to ensure subservience on the part of leaseholders: it is not pretty reading.
A tale of our time. Big man crushes small woman. Small woman represents herself in Court and because she is a novice takes four days to make her points instead of the single day if she had employed her own lawyers. Her services were "free" but she ended up having to pay four days of Landlord leagal costs instead of one.
ReplyDeleteVery sad, but Russian Oligarchs and others forcing up London property prices and lawayers and bankers paying themselves spectacular fees means that jo public get screwed from time. Maybe it is time for Corbyn to overturn the whole rotten system?
.........to install an even more rotten system?
Delete@07:40 Corbyn can only shout from the side lines and argue, he has never achieved anything and has nothing creative to add.
DeleteINTERESTINGLY he is not shouting at the moment!
Then the Tories have to work extra hard, show some leadership, and build a better society
DeleteAnd when have Labour ever done that?
ReplyDeleteHow about everything the Attlee government did after the War was over? I bet you use the NHS that the Tories are currently busy destroying.
DeleteHow about the Tories smashing the anarchic power of the trades unions? I bet Labour would never have the guts to do that. If all you can do is go back 70 years you must like most Labour live in the past. Labour destroyed the NHS by allowing hordes of immigrants in who have so overwhelmed it that even the immigrants who runs parts of it are fed up.
ReplyDeletewell said
ReplyDeleteGood start would be remove all people with conflict of interest from House of Lords. So for example the head of Wellcome Eliza Manningham-Buller sits in House of Lords and decides on all legislation including all legislatuon applicable to freeholders and leaseholders. Just in case you have wondered why the legislation is in favour of freeholders - all those in House of Lords with property intersts ( and there are many) are definitely not in a hurry to make the landlord and tenant legislation fair to leaseholders.
ReplyDeleteThe Wellcome Trust are one of the worst corporate landlord's. They just leave everything in the hands of their grasping and incompetent lawyers and agents whose only interest is fees. The worse the standard of management, the more they accidentally overcharge people the more disputes they create and the more they can cash in. The leaseholders can do little about It.
ReplyDeleteIf you sue they win, if you win, they also win. Then to make matters worse they tell the world and it's Courts that as a Charity their behaviour should be excused. They and Lady MB are a disgrace.
The Residential Tribunal is a total failure that needs radical reform if it is to escape the ownership of the large landlord's and their lawyers. As it is it is of no use to Leaseholders who are unable to get a fair hearing. It's a total disgrace, Sajid Javid should look at it urgently.
ReplyDeleteDracula?
ReplyDeleteIndeed reform of the tribunal is needed as landlord's word count more than reliable evidence provided by a lessee. So for example the Tribunal has decided that on balance of probabilities the Wellcome Trust does not overcharge lessees service charge.
ReplyDeleteThat was so despite the fact that all leases in the block where presented by the lessee at the hearing and based on the service charge percentages contributions as set out in the leases the lessees in the block are collectively responsible to pay 106,65% of the service charge. The lessee has argued that lessees are overcharged service charge by 6,65%.
Wellcome Trust claimed that they do not overcharge service charge but has failed to provide independent evidence such as an auditors report or audited accounts showing that they charge lessees different service charge percentage than the percentage set out in each lease.
Wellcome Trust has also failed to provide independent evidence such as audited accounts or auditors report that evidences they contribute fair service charge contribution (as they claimed they do) for the 3 very large flats in the block which Wellcome Trust owns and which are not leaseholds and which Wellcome Trust rents out directly to short term tenants.
Despite all this the Tribunal held in favour of the Wellcome Trust and decided that the Wellcome Trust does not overcharge lessees service charge.
I am still waiting for our accounts for the year ended June 2017. What have they to hide? Lots it would seem. If I challenge it I will no doubt also be up against CMS and Savilles and all these well paid hangers on.
ReplyDelete