Not quite a missing landlord

Two individuals jointly held the freehold of the building as tenants in common. The leaseholders had on many occasions and over a period of several years attempted to locate the landlord and written to various addresses they had for the landlords without success. Adverts were placed in newspapers local to the location of the building as well as in newspapers within the vicinity of the last known addresses for the landlords. Extensive enquiries of the Probate Registry did not reveal that either of the joint landlords had died.

Private agents were also instructed and successfully located one of the joint landlords. The landlord that had been duly located was unable to assist with the whereabouts of the other registered owner. Unsurprisingly, the landlord had also forgotten that she jointly held the freehold interest of the building.

The situation was therefore somewhat unusual on the basis that in previous applications made pursuant to section 26 of the 1993 Act, the landlord(s) had either been located and a deal was struck with the landlord or if the landlord(s) remained missing and the court was satisfied that this was the case and the leaseholders met the relevant requirements of the 1993 Act, the freehold effectively was sold (at the premium determined by the tribunal) to the party nominated by the leaseholders.

Having explored the circumstances with counsel, an application was made to court pursuant to Section 26 of the 1993 Act to include that an Initial Notice (the notice once served on the landlord triggers the formal procedure to forcefully acquire the freehold) could not be properly served pursuant to the 1993 Act; that the landlord who had been duly found be appointed the appropriate landlord for the purposes of the claim to acquire the freehold and service of the Initial Notice be dispensed with pursuant to the 1993 Act.

It was further requested the freehold be transferred into the name of the surviving landlord and another party in order to facilitate the transfer of the freehold. It was also ordered that the missing landlord’s share of the premium payable for the freehold less permissible costs be paid into court and notification of this upon the missing landlord was also dispensed with.

The freehold was successfully acquired from the landlord and shortly thereafter the leases were also duly extended.

Missing landlords is quite common. As can been seen, a landlord that is missing or cannot be found does not preclude the ability for leaseholders to acquire the freehold of their building even in the above context.