Powell and Powell v Cheltenham BC
Powell and Powell v Cheltenham BC
- 2001
- Rating and Valuation Reporter [2001] 144-147(4) .
The claimants P, bought Flat 1, 357 High Street, Cheltenham in 1996. Following the issuing of a closing order by C in respect of the flat, P sought compensation under the Housing Act 1985 s584A. P were aware that the flat was not in good condition when they purchased it , but claimed there had been a number of sales at 357 High Street since 1994, proving that there was a market for the flats, despite the deteriorating condition of the property. P referred to comparables of similarly-sized properties, which in good condition were selling in the 'upper twenties to lower thirties' bracket. At the date of the closing order, given the condition of the property and allowing a 60% discount to give a value, the flat was valued at £11,000. C said the flat was in such disrepair it had no value. "Held", no compensation was awarded because the claimants failed to prove their claim that diminution of value had occurred as a result of the closing order. Copy of decision available on http://www.courtservice.gov.uk/tribunals/lands/decisions/dec-lca-146-00.htm
POWELL AND POWELL V CHELTENHAM BC
HOUSING ACT 1985 S584A
DIMUNITION IN VALUE
DETERIORATION
OPEN MARKET VALUE
CLOSING ORDERS
COMPENSATION
CASE LAW
The claimants P, bought Flat 1, 357 High Street, Cheltenham in 1996. Following the issuing of a closing order by C in respect of the flat, P sought compensation under the Housing Act 1985 s584A. P were aware that the flat was not in good condition when they purchased it , but claimed there had been a number of sales at 357 High Street since 1994, proving that there was a market for the flats, despite the deteriorating condition of the property. P referred to comparables of similarly-sized properties, which in good condition were selling in the 'upper twenties to lower thirties' bracket. At the date of the closing order, given the condition of the property and allowing a 60% discount to give a value, the flat was valued at £11,000. C said the flat was in such disrepair it had no value. "Held", no compensation was awarded because the claimants failed to prove their claim that diminution of value had occurred as a result of the closing order. Copy of decision available on http://www.courtservice.gov.uk/tribunals/lands/decisions/dec-lca-146-00.htm
POWELL AND POWELL V CHELTENHAM BC
HOUSING ACT 1985 S584A
DIMUNITION IN VALUE
DETERIORATION
OPEN MARKET VALUE
CLOSING ORDERS
COMPENSATION
CASE LAW