3 Bosworth Close, Woodsetton, Dudley DY3 1BJ BIR/00CR/OAF/2026/0003
DECISION
Decision of the Tribunal (1) The tribunal determines that the price to be paid by the applicant for the purchase of the freehold on statutory terms is £2,283. The Background[1]This is an application under section 21 (1) (a) of the 1967 Act pursuant to an order made by District Judge Newham-Payne sitting at the County Court at Dudley on 17 November 2025 (“the order”).[2]Sections 21(1) and 27(5) of the 1967 Act concerns claims for the purchase of the reversionary freehold interest where the relevant landlord cannot be found. It enables the court to make a vesting order in respect of any interests of the landlord which are liable to acquisition.[3]Under section 27(5)(a) of the 1967 Act, the role of the tribunal is to determine the appropriate sum to be paid into court in respect of the landlord’s interests. This to be done in accordance with section 9 of the 1967 Act.[4]The applicant in this matter is Mr John Ian Barley. He is the qualifying tenant of 3 Bosworth Close, Woodsetton, Dudley DY3 1BJ (“the Property”) with a long tenancy within the meaning of section 3(1) of the 1967 Act. The respondent freehold owners are the successors in title to Mr William Taylor and Mrs Mary Taylor.[5]On 7 October 2025 the applicants issued a Part 8 Claim at Dudley County Court for an order pursuant to section 21(1) of the 1967 Act seeking the freehold of the Property. The Statement of Case at page 93 of the bundle claims this Part 8 application was made to the Court on 30 September 2025.[6]The applicant has been unable to ascertain the whereabouts of the respondents. The applicant subsequently applied for a vesting order under section 27(1) of the 1967 Act. The vesting order was granted subject to the determination of this tribunal.[7]The applicant has provided the tribunal with a valuation report prepared by Mr Geoffrey R Bates BA FRICS, a Consultant Chartered Surveyor acting on behalf of Adcocks Solicitors Limited dated 20 November 2025.[8]Mr G R Bates is of the view that the premium to be paid for the freehold is £2,100 as at the valuation date adopted of 30 September 2025, the date the Part 8 claim was submitted. The Determination[9]After scrutiny the tribunal accepts the opinions expressed by Mr G R Bates in his valuation report dated 20 November 2025 save that:(i) The Expert has allocated 33% of the Entirety Value to the site value. The tribunal has reviewed the site size, shape and location of the property. It has had regard for the plot the terraced property occupies which is long and narrow with an access to front and rear. The dwelling dominates the plot. The Upper Tribunal decision, Sabah El-Gadhy, Zara El-Gadhy v Liverpool City Council (LRA/78/2015) provides guidance on the matters to consider in determination of the appropriate percentage of the entirety value attributable to the site. In accordance with the guidance and previous Upper Tribunal decisions this tribunal has deemed 35% of the Entirety Value should be adopted as the apportioned site value in this valuation.(ii) The tribunal has calculated the reversion to be slightly longer than that advised by the Expert and the tribunal has adopted 66.8 years as remaining on the lease.[10]An adjusted calculation that adopts the revised parameter listed above at (i)–(ii) results in a freehold purchase premium of £2,283. A copy of the tribunal’s valuation is attached to this decision.[11]Accordingly, the tribunal determines that the premium to be paid in respect of the purchase of the freehold of the property is £2,283.[12]This matter should now be returned to the County Court sitting at Dudley under Claim Number MOODD 552 in order for the final procedures to take place. Ian B Holdsworth Valuer Chairman Appendix A : Premium Valuation RIGHTS OF APPEAL[1]If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) then a written application for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional Office which has been dealing with the case.[2]The application for permission to appeal must arrive at the Regional Office within 28-days after the Tribunal sends written reasons for the Decision to the person making the application.[3]If the application is not made within the 28-day time limit, such application must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28-day time limit; the Tribunal will then look at such reason(s) and decide whether to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed despite not being within the time limit.[4]The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates (ie, give the date, the property and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party making the application is seeking.