Even the council wouldn't be stupid enough to lease a stadium out without excluding the right to renewal.By law CCC would have to extend the lease. And there is a formula to work out the cost of it. Wasps paid the top amount.
Highs wouldn't sell to SISU? They tried enough times. But SISU went back on the agreement made each time.
It will be for housing. It has been applied in the past to offices that were formally houses but I don't think there's any examples of it applying to football stadiums.The formula for the cost of leasehold extension
Can anyone make sense of this and whether it’s relevant to commercial leases as well as residential?
what? Wasps bought the lease-holding company (ACL). Whatever they did with the lease which law obliges the owner to extend or re-negotiate the lease? Can go back and ask the owner to re-negotiate but is there a legal obligation for the owner to do so?By law CCC would have to extend the lease. And there is a formula to work out the cost of it. Wasps paid the top amount.
Highs wouldn't sell to SISU? They tried enough times. But SISU went back on the agreement made each time.
As I keep saying there is a formula to work out the cost of it. They paid the top end of the extension. It wasn't my idea. It is the law.Even the council wouldn't be stupid enough to lease a stadium out without excluding the right to renewal.
How have you worked out Wasps have paid top amount? The lease extension works out to £5K a year.
Any lease with less than 50 years IIRC can be renewed. There was 36 years left. Freeholders used to rip everyone off. So the law changed.what? Wasps bought the lease-holding company (ACL). Whatever they did with the lease which law obliges the owner to extend or re-negotiate the lease? Can go back and ask the owner to re-negotiate but is there a legal obligation for the owner to do so?
It will be for housing. It has been applied in the past to offices that were formally houses but I don't think there's any examples of it applying to football stadiums.
There is a right to extension on a commercial lease but its common practice to exclude it in the lease. Hence you see so may tenants being thrown out so their premises can be redeveloped.
Renegotiate against what the law says?what? Wasps bought the lease-holding company (ACL). Whatever they did with the lease which law obliges the owner to extend or re-negotiate the lease? Can go back and ask the owner to re-negotiate but is there a legal obligation for the owner to do so?
The price was set on an unused stadium. The stadium was unused to reduce what it was worth. Even SISU said it was hardly worth anything.But ACL has always had that option from day one. What I’d like to know is if there is a formula in law for commercial property, if so you can only assume that any valuation on ACL at any point has to be based on the possibility of the option for a lease extension being taken up at a formula set in law. That being the case it would be hard to see how SISU has a case. By the opposite token if there is a formula in law and this wasn’t considered in any valuation of ACL at any point then you’ve got to say that valuation was flawed in which case SISU has a case.
Can you provide a link as google isn't showing any such formula for commercial properties.As I keep saying there is a formula to work out the cost of it. They paid the top end of the extension. It wasn't my idea. It is the law.
Are you referring to the Leasehold Reform Act which gives the tenants of houses, in certain situations, the right to a 50 year extension?Any lease with less than 50 years IIRC can be renewed. There was 36 years left. Freeholders used to rip everyone off. So the law changed.
Exactly so its a nonsense for CCC to say there was no way it was possible for them to sell ACL with a 250 year lease.But ACL has always had that option from day one.
FAQs - Commercial leasesAny lease with less than 50 years IIRC can be renewed. There was 36 years left. Freeholders used to rip everyone off. So the law changed.
The stadium was not unused when it was sold.The price was set on an unused stadium. The stadium was unused to reduce what it was worth. Even SISU said it was hardly worth anything.
Exactly so its a nonsense for CCC to say there was no way it was possible for them to sell ACL with a 250 year lease.
Surely if it would add 30m to the value it would be worthwhile? Also easier to get finance and would be easier for their finances.Both partners in ACL at the time would have wanted to purchase an extension and there’s no evidence to suggest either the council or Higgs had the appetite to purchase an extension. Unless both partners were in agreement how would it have been possible?
Surely if it would add 30m to the value it would be worthwhile? Also easier to get finance and would be easier for their finances.
Renewing your lease: know your rights and don't get caught out!Voluntary regulations then. Doesn’t exactly strengthen SISU’s case.
Can someone point out to me how much Sisu would put in for a 50/50 share of the stadium which they now seem to value at about £47 million ,or do they expect to be given half . Were they not the ones who would not even give a charity £5 million for their half
What is odd?
Keep it simple.
An empty glass is just an empty glass even if you extend its useful life.
It’s what goes in the glass that gives it value.
*door closes*
It did add tens of millions to the value didn't it?How would it add £30M on to what they sold ACL for? It’s clear that Higgs at least if not CCC as well wanted shot. Why would they borrow more money to extend the lease when it might not even add value to what they were selling?
You have someone who would have checked every legality against someone who try and find something that looks like it might be wrong to tie the other side up with legal cases.It would probably be something like they go to the civil courts and try to make Wasps pay the £27m difference, then say they’ll drop the action if wasps give them half.
Of course the above would only ever happen if Wasps thought they were going to lose, which by SISUs track record they won’t be losing sleep over
Having two sporting clubs playing in a sporting arena against no sporting clubs playing in a sporting arena made nearly all of the difference.It did add tens of millions to the value didn't it?
You keep saying no sporting clubs, we were playing there. It wasn't empty.Having two sporting clubs playing in a sporting arena against no sporting clubs playing in a sporting arena made nearly all of the difference.
If you disagree would you like to explain why we moved to Northampton?
So why did we move back?You keep saying no sporting clubs, we were playing there. It wasn't empty.
It did add tens of millions to the value didn't it?
So why did we move back?
Oh yes the deal was already done. Otherwise we would still have been in Northampton.
What is odd?
That commercial is different to non commercial? Or is it private freeholders can work differently to public freeholders and try and get more money out of the leaseholders? Which is why that case went to court. It wasn't that many years ago that astronomical amounts were asked for. And the end is coming for builders that sell new housing as leasehold and then sell off the freehold to others. Too much greed got involved like doubling ground rent every 10 years.
But yes. Apples and pears are different.
The council meeting approving it was done a month after..So why did we move back?
Oh yes the deal was already done. Otherwise we would still have been in Northampton.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?