A meeting with Graham Jaffe

Q: What do you see your unique selling point (USP) to be, and from where do you pick up most of your work?

A: We primarily act for tenants, not exclusively as we do have some major corporate clients, but the majority of our work does come from tenants. What’s our USP? We have a very hands-on approach and ensure that we have a good relationship with valuers, surveyors and barristers and the other various people that we need.

Q: Has the credit crunch noticeably affected your firm and if so how have you adapted?

A: Within the wider firm, the only area that we’ve seen a downturn is residential conveyancing, where we have redeployed one of the fee earners to the enfranchisement department. So overall we haven’t lost any fee earners and in fact we’re gaining and the firm is growing. As far as enfranchisement goes, we haven’t seen a noticeable drop off in enquiries; if anything I believe that during a time of downturn people will look to enhance their assets by extending their lease or buying their freehold. Other firms are talking about a downturn; but right now we are not experiencing it.

Q: Do you think that is specific to your firm and do you think the enfranchisement industry as a whole will be adversely affected in the long-term?

A: I think we probably do better than most. This is because we are well known and we get a lot of referrals. I think we’re doing okay at the moment.

Q: You mentioned referrals there – do you find this is where you pick up most of your business from or do you have a more elaborate marketing strategy?

A: Yes, referrals continue to be crucial to our development within this sector. I recently enfranchised a small block in NW6 and within weeks I was working on another building on the same street. We do a good job and a lot of the referrals come via recommendations from existing clients. I also get some referrals from News on the Block magazine of course!

Q: As we’ve mentioned before, you specialise in enfranchisement – how do you find the attitudes of landlords and freeholders to be when served with a notice? Are they accepting of the law or do they tend to make things as difficult as possible for you?

A: Some do. Some also have very difficult solicitors but I can often break through this. I have a good relationship with the agents and solicitors for the bigger landed estates and the bigger companies. With smaller freeholders, I often write the first letter directly to them in the form of a personal letter and I will also call them. I find a friendly, sensible and reasonable approach to a freeholder gets a deal done. It is important to remember that the freeholder wants to stick by the law, they don’t want any voluntary agreements, certainly not the bigger ones anyway.

Q: Would you agree that enfranchisement is a London-centric activity or has it become more accessible to lessees nationwide?

A: Well I am currently acting for a fair number of properties that are outside of central London. Places such as Morden, Littlehampton, and a few on the south coast. However, this often causes a bit of a dilemma because the people outside London are not used to paying London solicitor’s rates and yet they struggle to find solicitors out of London who have the relevant expertise. We do sometimes make a bit of a concession on fees and we try to use local valuers where possible. I’ve had out-of-town valuers in Littlehampton telling me that a 61 year-old lease doesn’t have any Marriage Value, but I just laughed that one off! There is certainly a lot of business on the south coast in places such as Brighton and we are keen to expand and do work down there.

Q: Do you find that people are sometimes put off by the costs associated with enfranchisement? What would you say to people who may be interested but are worried by the large legal bills they may face?

A: If lessees instruct a lawyer, who lacks experience, and quotes a ridiculously low figure, they are going to pay a huge price because they are probably going to make mistakes. I currently have seven or eight files with my litigation team. These are files I’ve taken over from inexperienced lawyers who have tried to do the work. It is specialist work and I readily admit that I’m expensive, but I give value for money. I work fast and I usually get a result. I tell the clients that I want them to be happy with the result and I want them to be happy with the fees as well.

In a big block where the cost is shared the legal fees on both sides can add up to a significant sum, but it’s generally still fairly small compared to the cost of the freehold. The main thing is to get the freehold and that is what I tell the clients.

Q: Do you have any advice for people looking for ways to fund a collective enfranchisement?

A: Yes I do. I’m proactive in that I try to keep it simple. I try not to let people get too worried about how they’re going to fund the share of freehold of non-participants. Some lawyers get it wrong; 20 flats, 14 participating; they try to make the 14 pay for the 20 and often come unstuck because the 14 are stuck with an investment in those six that didn’t participate. If they sell their flat they’ve lost the money. I usually find a white knight (preferably from within the block) to fund the share of freehold relating to the non-participating flats. For individuals who fund their own share, I usually go to their mortgagees and I help them. I do their conveyancing for them at a reduced rate so they can get a further advance on re-mortgaging.

Q: What about life after enfranchisement? Do you take feedback from blocks you have helped enfranchise in the past? How do things improve for them?

A: Yes we do because they refer other people! We often stay involved and act for them in dealing with things such as sales, license to assign and deeds of variation. Also, we almost always are involved in turning the leases into 999 years.

Many of my files running along the wall behind me in my office are for blocks of flats where we’ve bought the freehold and now we are the company solicitors.

Q: Finally, enfranchisement has only been made possible by recent major reforms to UK property law. But are you happy will the law as it stands or are there any changes that you feel are still needed?

A: If talking specifically about enfranchisement law I think the two-year ownership rule for extending a lease should be abolished. I believe that there should be penalties on freeholders who will not accept reasonable offers for freeholds and who force lessees to go to the LVT. If you offer £20,000 and they want £40,000 and the LVT says £22,000, for example, then I believe the freeholder should be penalised in costs. You tend to find a lot of freeholders are now rejecting sensible offers, hoping they will go away and not bother going to the Tribunal. I think they should be penalised. But most importantly I do think the two-year rule should be abolished, but I can’t see that happening any time soon.

Look out for further interviews and articles on enfranchisement in the next issue.