LOOKING AFTER ELDERLY

Your article 'Giving vintage advice' (see [2002] Gazette, 31 October, 28) was of particular interest to us as we have a busy and thriving elderly client care department, the success of which cannot be put down to expertise alone.

This firm employs a mature solicitor with hands-on experience of looking after an elderly relative, showing patience and respect for the elderly, and more particularly spending time with the elderly both in and out of the office, to provide the old-style legal service to which they have become accustomed.

We are taking our elderly client-care service to Spain in the new year to advise and assist the many British residents who need help in Spain on elderly client care and other matters but cannot obtain it locally.

Working in conjunction with British consular offices, and with abogados having an extensive British resident client base, we expect to be busy.

Colin Whyman, solicitor, Boys & Maughan, Margate, Kent

MATTER OF CHOICE

District Judge Neil Hickman's letter on the subject of business lease renewals in the county court (see [2002] Gazette, 7 November, 18), illustrates the general judicial failure to see any distinction between that species of court proceedings and others.

The Civil Procedure Rules proceed on the principle that if you have invoked the jurisdiction of the court, then you will be taken at face value as seeking to have a dispute resolved justly and fairly.

You should not serve proceedings only as a tactical measure, nor should you use the court system as an instrument of oppression by manipulation of procedural rules, persistent delay or refusal to concede points well made against you - and if you do, then costs penalties will follow.

This is all as it should be, and the judiciary has rightly promoted this approach with enthusiasm.

The problem with business lease renewals is that the parties have had no choice in the matter.

There is no question of proceedings being issued as a tactical step - if the tenant fails to issue, then he loses his business premises.

Persistent delay, in lease renewal cases, is not an instance of oppression, but a sign that the parties are reluctant litigants.

If either party wishes to move matters forward, then they can easily do so.

Lease renewal litigation is best understood as a statutory negotiating framework, with a fallback facility for court determination.

Until one party has sought a directions timetable, thus indicating that they wish the court to determine the matter, then yes, a two-line letter indicating that the parties are negotiating should suffice.

To require experts' reports and preparation for trial is to commit the parties to expenditure which may outweigh any rent increase or decrease for years to come.

Mark Shelton, professional support lawyer, real estate group, DLA, Birmingham

TAX BY STEALTH

District Judge Neil Hickman in responding to my letter of 17 October 2002 discusses the options available to stay Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 proceedings for a limited period to enable negotiations to take place.

His letter misses the point entirely.

It should not matter to Parliament or to him whether negotiations for a new lease take five months or five years.

No one except the parties should be involved.

All that was required was some mechanism to bring a lease renewal inside the court's jurisdiction if either landlord or tenant was being disadvantaged by delay.

Everyone else could have benefited from a litigation-free zone.

I asked why common sense had not prevailed during the review preceding the introduction of the Civil Procedure Rules.

I concluded that it suited the Lord Chancellor's Department (LCD) to hold on to a substantial chunk of revenue.

At the moment, a minimum of 120 is paid in court fees whether the lease is granted inside or outside the Act.

I am still waiting to hear from the LCD how much revenue is generated each year by this stealth tax on business tenants.

Philippa Dolan, Rochman Landau, London

REGISTRY ON THE BALL

Clearly the land registry is ready for the new era.

I sent an application for registration on 12 November with a covering letter explaining that the client was selling and hence the need for speed.

I received the call at 11.30am the next day to say it had completed the process and the certificate would be in the DX that night.

Is there any need for a new system? In the meantime, well done Peterborough District Land Registry.

Mike Theeman, Fisher Jones Greenwood, Colchester