Home » News » Landlord loses case for £4 million after dramatic fire damages seven flats previous nextRegulation & LawLandlord loses case for £4 million after dramatic fire damages seven flatsLegal tussle between freeholder and apartment leaseholder ends with claims for refurbishment costs and lost rent rejected by judge.Nigel Lewis22nd January 201901,758 Views A rental landlord seeking compensation from a building owner after a fire broke out in a restaurant below flats it was renting out has lost its fight in the courts nine years after the blaze.The fire, liability for which was accepted by the owner of the restaurant at 228 York Road in Battersea, London (pictured), gutted or extensively damaged the three floors above the property which at the time contained seven apartments.After the dramatic blaze on New Year’s Day in 2010, which saw 40 fire fighters rescue two tenants from its top floors, the residents of all the properties had to move out and were collectively awarded over £200,000 in compensation by the building’s insurer.The flats’ leaseholder Palliser Ltd, which holds a 999-year lease on the property, has been seeking compensation of nearly £4 million from freeholder Fate Ltd, which also owned the restaurant below. This included the £225,000 cost of refurbishing the properties plus ‘lost rent’.But in the judgement for the case Andrew Burrows QC has said that Palliser is only due £8,500.“The claim for loss of profits fails because the claimant falls a long way short of proving on the balance of probabilities that, but for the fire, it would have sold 228 York Road in 2010 or that it would have gone on to make the profits (of £3,803,721 plus interest) as set out in the schedule,” he said.During the case it emerged that Fate Ltd had under-valued the property as a whole and that its insurance did not cover the floors above the restaurant. After the fire Fate Ltd went into liquidation and it took seven years for the restaurant to re-open.Read the judgement in full. palliser ltd Andrew Burrows QC fate ltd January 22, 2019Nigel LewisWhat’s your opinion? Cancel replyYou must be logged in to post a comment.Please note: This is a site for professional discussion. Comments will carry your full name and company.This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.Related articles Letting agent fined £11,500 over unlicenced rent-to-rent HMO3rd May 2021 BREAKING: Evictions paperwork must now include ‘breathing space’ scheme details30th April 2021 City dwellers most satisfied with where they live30th April 2021
Missing – Sean DiverA sighting of a missing man in Co Donegal has led to Gardai join the search.Sean ‘Smurf’ Diver has been missing from his Co Tyrone home since Wednesday but may have been spotted in the Lifford area on Thursday evening.The 39-year-old was last seen on Townsend Street in Strabane on Wednesday evening. The PSNI have been searching the River Mourne in Co Tyrone after a report that someone fell into the water on Wednesday night.Now Police say a man matching his description may have been spotted at the Old Railway Bridge in the Porthall area of Lifford at around 8.30am on Thursday.He is described as being 5’7” in height, of slim build and with dark brown hair.Mr Diver also has a tattoos on each side of his neck reading ‘mum’ and ‘dad’. When last seen, he is understood to have been wearing dark coloured tracksuit bottoms with red stripes on each side, dark footwear with white soles and either a dark red coloured hooded top with white writing on the chest, or a dark coloured jacket.MISSING MAN MAY HAVE BEEN SPOTTED IN DONEGAL was last modified: January 30th, 2016 by StephenShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window) Tags:donegalmissingSean DuffystrabaneTyrone
Your Contact Leaves: Is there anything worse that developing an opportunity, getting it right up to the line, and then having your primary sponsor leave? Yes, there is. Your contact could be replaced by someone with different priorities or who is adamantly opposed to your initiative. The downside of a new contact is that often abandon initiatives that haven’t yet been started. The upside is that they are often change agents, and if you get to the them early enough you can present your initiative as that change. But if you only have one sponsor and you haven’t asked that sponsor to help you gain executive sponsorship, you have made a mistake.The Budget Disappears: Your contact has the money to make the change you have been working on, and then, without warning, your prospective client company makes dramatic cuts. The budget for your solution dissolves. Unless you have positioned your solution as something that is going to increase revenue, decrease costs, and improve profits, you’re in real trouble. The way to find the money for your solution is to ensure it pays for itself . . . and adds something to the kitty.New Leadership Takes Over: New leaders make changes. When new leaders enter the picture, they’re they to make change, to make an improvements. They kill a lot of unborn initiatives to make room for their own priorities. The earlier you reach new leaders, schedule time, and align your initiative with their new initiatives, the better your chances of keeping your solution from finding its way into the dustbin.Pushed to Next Quarter (Year): This is tough one to come back from. It’s not a “no.” But more time only puts your opportunity at greater risk. More time means more time without the results that your solution produces. That’s time without the additional revenue, reduced costs, increased revenue. It’s time without having their problem solved. Sometimes the best way to keep a deal from pushing is to show the cost of not changing now.
zoomIllustration. Image Courtesy of chuttersnap on Unsplash. Japan-based Mitsui & Co has been linked to an order of two Kamsarmax bulk carriers in China.The company has increased its orderbook at Yangzijiang shipyard by adding the 82,000 dwt bulker pair, according to information provided by Intermodal Shipbrokers.As informed, the ships are scheduled for delivery in 2020.The deal for the newbuilds, which are worth USD 27 million, is understood to have been concluded last month, Clarksons Platou revealed in its weekly bulletin.World Maritime News contacted Mitsui for more details on the matter, however, the company is yet to reply.MOL, part of Mitsui Group, currently has two 82,000 dwt bulkers on order at Yangzijiang yard, slated for delivery in 2019, VesselsValue’s data shows.World Maritime News Staff