Frequently Asked Questions

Can I apply for planning permission on a property I do not own?

Yes, you can submit a planning application to the local planning authority (LPA) even though you don't own the property. Consent from the current owners is not required.

Where the applicant does not own an interest in the land, notice of the planning application must be given to the owners of the land. "Owner" means a person having a freehold interest in the land or a leasehold interest, with at least seven years left to run.

In the planning application, the applicant must certify that the notification requirements have been satisfied. The planning application must also contain the appropriate ownership certificate, otherwise the LPA will not register the application.

Do I have to disclose the presence of Japanese knotweed on the sale of a property?

The relevant legislation on invasive weeds is designed to prevent the spreading of knotweed. It does not impose a legal obligation on the owner or occupier of a site to:

• Inform anyone that knotweed is present.
• Remove it from his land

The normal rules "oncaveat emptor" (buyer beware) would apply. This means that the seller is not under a duty to disclose any information about the physical condition of the property.

In property standard pre-contract enquiries

• There is an enquiry which asks for details about rising damp, rot, fungal or other infection or infestation.
• There is an enquiry which asks for details about hazardous substances or contaminative (or potentially contaminative) material.

Arguably, neither of these enquiries is designed to catch invasive weeds such as Japanese knotweed.

The buyer could supplement standard enquiries with a specific question about Japanese knotweed. However, if the seller replies saying "please rely on your own enquiries" (as is often the case), the buyer will still be none the wiser as to whether knotweed is present.

It is common practice in most commercial property transactions for a buyer to commission an environmental desktop report.

However, those types of reports are based on publicly available information and do not include a site visit, so would not shed any light on whether knotweed is present.

Therefore, if a buyer is concerned about knotweed (for example, because he plans to redevelop), he should commission a specific assessment, either from a surveyor with the relevant expertise or from an environmental consultant.

Anyone disposing of knotweed should be aware that there are legal obligations involved in the disposal of knotweed off-site, or the burning, burying or treating of it on-site.

It should also be borne in mind that if knotweed were to spread onto neighbouring land, this might amount to a common law nuisance, in which case it would be up to the neighbouring landowner to commence civil proceedings.

Can there be more than one landlord of a lease?

Yes.  This is generally known as a split reversion. A split reversion arises where two or more different landlords own separate parts of the property but the tenant occupies under one tenancy. This usually happens where one landlord sells part of its reversion to a third party.

A split reversion can also arise where a tenant that holds two properties let by the same landlord under separate leases for different terms sub-lets both properties under a single lease, then later the term of one of the headleases expires by effluxion of time. Similarly, a tenant may hold two properties under separate leases granted by different landlords and then sub-lets both properties under a single lease, and subsequently the head leases expire by effluxion of time.

The splitting of the reversion does not bring two or more separate tenancies into existence. Notwithstanding the severance of the reversion, a single tenancy remains.

Consequently, prior to agreeing any contract in respect of the sale of part of the reversion, there are a number of issues to consider, which include:

• The apportionment of rent and liability under the lease.
• Adapting the usual covenant to comply with the landlord covenants (which the buyer typically provides in the transfer).
• If the lease has security of tenure under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, dividing the reversion will have implications: when serving section 25 notices, counter-notices and making applications; and if the tenant claims compensation under section 37.
• Whether one of the landlords acting alone can do anything that will affect the other landlord's investment such as forfeiting or accepting a surrender of part of the lease.

Whilst technically it is possible to split the reversion, split reversions present a number of problems and are complex arrangements that are usually best avoided.

How long is it reasonable for a landlord to delay giving consent to the tenant's proposed alterations?

There is little case law on what is a reasonable withholding of consent for alterations, compared with decisions relating to consents for assignments and underlettings.

Landlords should bear in mind the following:

• A landlord is entitled to be given enough information to allow it to ascertain the precise nature of the alterations to which it is being asked to consent.

•  It is not reasonable for a landlord to withhold consent on the basis that the tenant failed to provide adequate information about the tenant's proposal if the landlord has allowed an unreasonably long period to pass without requesting that information. Accordingly, if the landlord needs further information about the proposed alterations, this should be requested promptly.

• A delay in responding to a tenant's application means the landlord will not have given any reasons for allowing or refusing consent. Consequently, it will be for the landlord to demonstrate that this was reasonable.

Generally, the burden of proving that consent has been unreasonably withheld falls on the tenant. However, if the landlord has not given its reasons, then the onus shifts onto the landlord to prove that it acted reasonably.

• Although compliance is only voluntary, the Code for Leasing Business Premises in England and Wales 2007 (Lease Code 2007) includes requirements relating to the way that landlords deal with applications for consent. The Lease Code 2007 requires landlords to make decisions on consents for alterations within 15 working days of receiving full information from the tenant.

Based on the Lease Code 2007 provisions, it seems fair to assume that 15 working days would be a reasonable period for a landlord to respond substantively to a tenant's request for consent for alterations. It is possible that a landlord may not be unreasonably delaying its consent if it gives a decision within a longer timescale but it is difficult to be categoric. Invariably, it will depend on the circumstances.

There are certain limited instances where a landlord is subject to a specific time limit for giving consent to alterations:

• If a tenant of a property used for a trade or business serves a notice on the landlord under section 3 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 of its intention to carry out improvements, the landlord has three months in which to object to the proposed improvements.

• Regardless of what the lease says, Schedule 21 to the Equality Act 2010 provides for a reasonable consent regime where an occupier of leasehold premises is under a duty to make reasonable adjustments to assist disabled people under the EqA 2010. The Equality Act 2010 (Disability) Regulations 2010 prescribe the circumstances in which a landlord who has received a written application for consent for alterations will be regarded as having withheld consent.

In broad terms, the Disability Regulations give the landlord 42 days from the date on which an application for consent is received in which to respond, in writing. If the landlord requires plans and a specification to determine the application, the landlord must request these within 21 days of receiving the tenant's application.