Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

SOUTHWARK AVOIDS PAY-BACK TO RIGHT TO BUY PURCHASERS

  • Comment
23 March 2000 ...
23 March 2000

Local authorities throughout the country will breathe a sigh of relief in the wake of a High Court ruling today in which the London Borough of Southwark warded off a potential 1.3 million pay-back to its right-to-buy purchasers of council property.

Had the decision gone the other way lawyers say other local

authorities, including Southwark, could have faced pay-back claims totalling many millions.

Today though Mr Justice Lightman ruled at the High Court that

Southwark was not obliged to pay back to the buyers commission it had received from the Zurich Insurance Company in respect of block policies taken out under the terms of the right-to-buy deals.

The terms of the deal under which 6,046 have taken advantage of right to buy offers are contained in a standard form of lease granted by Southwark and stipulate that the Council will insure the property and charge the premiums to the lessees.

However, the Council obtained what it calls 'service commission' of

around 1.3 million on the insurance which it said it could keep but which the lessees said they should be given allowance for.

Agreement has already been reached that a percentage of the money

received by the council should be credited to the lessees. But the Council argued that it was, nevertheless, entitled to keep a further 20 per cent paid in commission. Now the High Court has backed the Council's stance.

Mr Justice Lightman said he recognised that concern might be felt by

those such as Michael and Lillian Williams of 31, Yharnfield Square, Clayton Road, London SE15, who spear-headed the case, that the Council had taken advantage of its position as a landlord to enter into the insurance deal and obtain the benefits flowing from it.

However, he continued : 'The 20 per cent payment to the Council is not in law or fact a rebate or deduction from the premium payable. It is a payment for services.

end

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.