Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

As to why commonhold is rarely used, there were two reasons floating about when it was first introduced, which may be equally valid today. First, it was new, and few were brave enough to adopt an untested new system (be they developers, mortgagees, homeowners, lawyers or whatever). Secondly, a part of the drive behind commonhold was the perception that landlords were cavalier with block spending, landing lessees with large and little expected bills. However, it was soon realised that with commonhold there would be no-one else to blame or complain about - better to have a landlord to grumble about, and even get charges reduced through the LVT/First Tier Tribunal if the landlord made a mistake in the process. Doesn't really work with commonhold.

As for a new housing court, I agree with the comments of others that this is a complex and difficult area of law, and there is certainly scope for a specialist housing tribunal. It is however improbable that it could function in any normal judicial sense (i.e. not being inquisitorial) without the parties being assisted or fully represented.

As for arbitration ... great as arbitration can be, it is a way of privatising dispute resolution, with two consequences: the development of limited (or no) precedents; and the privatisation, at the parties' expense, of the whole disputes process. Both consequences are likely to lead to greater expense and uncertainty.

Your details

Cancel