Adam v Woking BC
Series: Rating and Valuation Reporter ; [2000] RVR 329-334(6)Publication details: 2000Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: LT 7 February 2000. Claimant A sought compensation for disturbance under the Land Compensation Act 1973 S38(1), following the loss of her flat after it was declared unfit for human habitation. A turned down the rehousing options, including a first floor flat, offered by Woking BC (W) while she was waiting for legal proceedings to conclude. On her landlord successfully obtaining a possession order against A, W offered a 1st floor flat which A then declared was unsuitable as she was asthmatic and her dog was arthritic and unable to negotiate stairs. Because of problems with moving in to the flat, A was paid a home loss payment and compensation by W. However A claimed further compensation for items such a kennelling and other additional expenses but it was held that the compensation offered by W was sufficient.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS63290 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 110007-1001 |
LT 7 February 2000. Claimant A sought compensation for disturbance under the Land Compensation Act 1973 S38(1), following the loss of her flat after it was declared unfit for human habitation. A turned down the rehousing options, including a first floor flat, offered by Woking BC (W) while she was waiting for legal proceedings to conclude. On her landlord successfully obtaining a possession order against A, W offered a 1st floor flat which A then declared was unsuitable as she was asthmatic and her dog was arthritic and unable to negotiate stairs. Because of problems with moving in to the flat, A was paid a home loss payment and compensation by W. However A claimed further compensation for items such a kennelling and other additional expenses but it was held that the compensation offered by W was sufficient.