Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.582151
Title: Commonhold compared : a comparison of commonhold with "Residents' Management Company Leasehold" tenure
Author: Roberts, Nicholas Thomas Morris
Awarding Body: University of Southampton
Current Institution: University of Southampton
Date of Award: 2008
Availability of Full Text:
Full text unavailable from EThOS.
Please contact the current institution’s library for further details.
Abstract:
This dissertation compares commonhold, as enacted by the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, with 'RMC Leasehold' -long leasehold, with the freehold owned by the leaseholders through a Residents' Management Company. Its thesis is that commonhold is not always superior to RMC Leasehold; that, in several respects, RMC Leasehold may be preferable; and that the two models of ownership should therefore continue to co-exist. It argues that the Aldridge Committee in 1987 ignored the existence of RMC Leasehold, and that therefore its commonhold proposals did not benefit from experience of it. It emphasised the 'wasting asset' deficiency of leasehold, and overlooked the 'mismatch' between the ground landlord's financial stake and its powers, an imbalance which may be advantageous when the leaseholders collectively constitute the landlord. Commonhold and RMC Leasehold are compared, focussing on themes such as the tenurial aspect: how far commonhold can deliver freehold ownership as it is generally understood, and the implications of its limitations on the control of dispositions; how negative and positive obligations may be enforced within commonhold and RMC Leasehold developments, both between the body corporate and flat-owners and between flat-owners inter se; the levying and status of service charge funds and their commonhold equivalents; how leases and the Commonhold Community Statement may be varied; and the position of the flat-owners if the body corporate becomes insolvent or a majority wishes to sell for redevelopment. The study concludes that, although the inapplicability of forfeiture can be seen as making the unit-holder more secure, the leaseholder has the advantage, both on insolvency, and where the majority wishes a sale; that it is less likely that an RMC Leasehold development will change its character; and that RMC Leasehold may, therefore, be more appropriate for flat-owners who prefer to accept the restrictions inherent in a more regulated community.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.582151  DOI: Not available
Share: