How can you challenge an unfair service charge as a leaseholder?

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, recently created headlines when he voiced his belief that the law should be changed so that leaseholders should reserve the right to refuse to pay service charges if they believe that they are too high. Many leaseholders have seen their service charges increase substantially in recent times, with the average service charge on a flat in England and Wales now standing at £2,247 per year, a staggering 31% higher than in the first quarter of 2019.

Khan stated, “While many landlords act responsibly, we need stronger rights for leaseholders to act against those who don’t, with new powers of redress and the ability to withhold service charges that simply aren’t justified.” Part of his proposals include the ability for leaseholders to withhold the payment of service charges for payments that have not been provided for in writing, such as in a statement of accounts.

While refusing to pay your service charge is a bad idea, as it could lead to eviction or repossession, leaseholders do have certain rights when it comes to their service charge. One of these rights is the ability to challenge a service charge. But, as a leaseholder, when is it possible to challenge an unfair service charge and how can you do it?

Keep reading to find out.

What is a service charge?

If someone owns a flat then they will share their building with other people. Leaseholders own the flat itself, but they do not own the land it sits on. As a result, the landlord, or freeholder will charge the leaseholder a service charge in return for providing services to a building.

This can cover a wide variety of services such as general maintenance and repairs, buildings insurance, central heating, lifts, lighting, cleaning etc. The payment period for a service charge is generally one year, but payments may have to be made on a more frequent basis.

So, how can you challenge a service charge you believe is unfair? Keep reading to find out.

When can you challenge a service charge?

While there is no limit when it comes to service charges, they must be deemed reasonable. If they are not, then it is possible to challenge them. However, the law does not define ‘reasonable’ in this context.

It is important to note that you do not have to pay for any service charges which are not included in your lease. It is worth double checking your lease to ensure that you are not being charged for anything which is not included in your lease.

The expense also must have been reasonably incurred. If the windows required a repair rather than a complete new replacement, this may not be an example of a reasonable service charge.

The job or service must also have been carried out at a reasonably standard. If some communal tiling starts to come loose after only a few months then this is clearly not an example of a job which was carried out at a reasonable standard.

Finally, if the amount charged for a job or service was not reasonable then this may also be a matter which can be challenged.

How do you challenge a service charge?

As a leaseholder, you have the right to apply to a tribunal to challenge any service charge, or proposed service charge, which you feel is unreasonable. Your landlord can also ask the tribunal if a service charge is reasonable. The cost for applying to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) is fixed at £100 for all applications “to commence proceedings for a determination of liability to pay and reasonableness of service charges” ((Section 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985). The hearing fee is fixed at £200.

If you have already agreed or admitted responsibility for paying the charges then you cannot apply to a tribunal. This also applies in cases where the charges have been decided by a court or tribunal, or by arbitration following a dispute.

If your service charge is due, then in most cases it is advisable to continue to pay it. However, at the same time you can advise your landlord then you will be challenging the charge at a tribunal. If you are successful at a tribunal then the landlord will be forced to repay the amount that you overpaid for.

Our thoughts

Ultimately, if you are unhappy with the way your building is managed then it may not make sense to continue applying to the First-tier Tribunal. An alternative to this is to make a Right to Manage application or to buy the freehold. However, neither of these solutions may be possible if not enough of the flats in the building are let to “qualifying tenants”. When it comes to either buying the freehold or making a Right to Manage application, two thirds of the flats in the block must be let to a ‘qualifying tenant’, also known as a leaseholder.

We previously assisted a group of leaseholders on a dispute regarding the service charge passed on by the landlord for repairs to building parts that were considered structural and should not be included in the service charge. To address such an issue, a detailed investigation into the lease agreement content is necessary. Additionally, obtaining a professional surveyor report on the structural issues that need to be remedied would be beneficial in resolving the dispute effectively.

We also advised on a case where the issue stems from the contractor or subcontractor and the building was constructed with defects. This would indeed be unreasonable and unfair to pass the cost of repairs onto the leaseholder. In such a scenario, leaseholders should not be burdened with costs that are a result of construction defects or contractor negligence.

If your lease contains a forfeiture clause for breach of non-payment of service charge, even though you consider the charge is not reasonable, we will advise against not paying it and risking your lease being forfeited.

Have any further questions? Get in touch with us today.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Deliveroo, Just Eat and Uber Eats increase security procedures to prevent illegal working

The Home Office have announced that three major food delivery companies, Deliveroo, Just Eat and Uber Eats are to undertake enhanced security checks to prevent illegal working.

There appears to have been a major increase of illegal working with these companies, with some driver’s accounts being shared by others. Some drivers have taken advantage of the system to avoid completing right to work checks. This relates to those that are not permitted to work, or alternatively, there are some skilled worker visas who use the companies for additional income. This is not permitted under the immigration rules as delivery driver jobs are not an eligible occupation.

The government has made a concerted effort to crack down on illegal working in recent times, with enforcement visits rising by 68% last year and arrests more than doubling. Meanwhile, returns of people who have no right to be in the UK has increased by two-thirds.

Comments by the delivery companies

The three delivery companies have commented on the announcement as follows:

A Deliveroo spokesperson said:

“We take our responsibilities extremely seriously and are committed to strengthening our controls to prevent misuse of our platform.

We are the first major platform to roll out direct right to work checks, a registration process and identity verification technology to ensure that only substitutes with right to work can continue riding on our platform.”

They added, “We will continue to work in close collaboration with the Home Office and leaders in industry to support efforts in this area.”

An Uber Eats spokesperson said:

At Uber Eats we are going to roll out identity verification checks to help ensure only those who legitimately use someone else’s account to earn with us are able to, and we are pleased to be working with government to find a solution.

A Just Eat spokesperson said:

We take our responsibilities on this issue seriously and have high expectations for couriers delivering on our behalf which is why we’re continuing our work together with industry and policymakers to develop a solution which will ensure couriers substituting their work do so in accordance with the law.

The gig economy, which food delivery companies are a major part of, has often resisted regulation of the sector. For instance, efforts by Uber drivers to be classed as workers rather than self-employed contractors were met with great resistance. However, the Supreme Court later held that Uber drivers are workers, granting them a host of new rights.

Ultimately, ensuring that substitute deliver drivers have the right to work in the UK will provide reassurance to both customers and employers.

We at Lisa’s Law will keep you updated on any new developments.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Disability benefits to be overhauled, with “lesser mental health conditions” such as anxiety and depression to be targeted

The government has announced plans to significantly overhaul the way that disability benefits are paid through Personal Independence Payment reform (PIP). As part of the announcement , a consultation has been launched on proposals for moving away from a fixed cash benefit system.

The Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has previously voiced his desire to increase the number of people in work, vowing to tackle what he described as Britain’s “sick note culture”. The UK’s out of work population has increased sizably since Covid, with many citing long Covid as a reason for being out of work. Overall, there are currently over 2.6 million people of working age in the UK who are receiving PIP.

There are currently 33,000 new PIP applications which are approved every month, double the number which were being approved prior to the pandemic. The government have claimed that this is partly due to the rise in people who are receiving PIP for mental health conditions including anxiety and depression, with this rising from 2,200 to 5,300 per month since 2019. The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Mel Stride, has suggested that people who have milder mental health conditions would no longer receive financial support.

But what exactly is PIP, and what reforms are the government proposing? Keep reading to find out more.

What is a Personal Independence Payment?

PIP, which stands for personal independence payment, was introduced in 2013. It replaced Disability Living Allowance, and provides regular payments to working age people for help with living costs which are caused by long-term disabilities or ill health, whether physical or mental. The maximum weekly payment is £184.30 and you are able to claim for PIP whether you have a job or not.

PIP is divided into 2 parts – those who have difficulty in doing everyday tasks or getting around because of their condition. This determines how much money you receive based on the difficulty with which you experience everyday tasks and getting around. It is key to point out that the mobility aspect of PIP is not purely related to physical disability, but also for those who have difficulty getting around because of a cognitive or mental health condition such as anxiety.

The government estimates that PIP will grow by 52% by from 2023/2024 to 2027/2028. It is also expected to cost the taxpayer £28 billion per year by 2028/2029, a 110% increase in spending since 2019.

What reforms to PIP are being proposed by the government?

The main reforms to PIP focus on moving it away from a “one size fits all” fixed cash benefit system. Plans to reform personal independence payments (PIP) will include changes to eligibility criteria and assessments.

. While there will be a 12 week consultation period which closes on 23^rd July, a number of proposals have already been put forward. These include the following:

Changing the qualifying period for PIP to determine if a condition is likely to continue long term
Consider if some people could receive PIP without an assessment based on the support of medical evidence
Looking at whether evidence of a formal diagnosis by a medical expert should be a requirement to be assessed as eligible for PIP
Options being considered include one-off grants for help with significant costs including expensive equipment or home adaptations, as well as giving vouchers towards specific costs
For those receiving PIP with lower or no extra costs, considerations are being made as to whether better access to treatment should be provided instead of cash payments

The government have claimed that these changes are being proposed due to the difference in costs between claimants. However, this does not acknowledge the fact that the current system has been in place since 2013.

Our thoughts

The UK has a productivity issue to go alongside its stagnating economy, and this move is clearly designed to disincentivise more people from claiming PIP due to so-called “lesser mental health conditions” including anxiety and depression.

In combination with Mr Sunak’s previous announcement that the fit note system would be revised by shifting the responsibility for signing people off work from GPs towards “specialist work and health professionals”, it signals a desire to take vast numbers off PIP and reduce those who are signed off work. Whether this will be effective remains to be seen, however many of those affected will question the decision given the lack of effective mental health support in the NHS at present.

We will provide updates on these proposals as and when they arrive. Subscribe to our newsletter for more information about the latest changes in employment law.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Rwanda declared a a safe country by Parliament, paving the way for asylum seekers removals

On the 25th of April 2024, the contentious Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill, received Royal Assent and became law. The passing of this bill marks a big step forward for the UK government’s plans to remove asylum seekers to their chosen third country, Rwanda. The government has announced that the preparatory stages of this plan have been established to ensure the first flight to Rwanda will happen in July 2024, with more flights set to follow. Let’s take a look at the Safety of Rwanda Bill and its legal consequences.

The Bill’s passing highlights the government’s ambitious endeavour to vastly reduce immigration figures, while the twists and turns of the Rwanda Deal over the past two years may foreshadow hurdles that the implementation of the bill will encounter.

What is the Rwanda Deal?

First, let’s just recap the Rwanda deal. On 13^th April 2022, former Home Secretary Dame Priti Patel announced a 5-year plan for an asylum partnership arrangement between the government of the United Kingdom and the government of the Republic of Rwanda. The plan aimed to tackle the issue of small boats crossing the Channel by outsourcing the asylum processing offshore. Boris Johnson, the previous prime minister opined that this scheme would break the business model of ‘vile people smugglers’ and ‘save countless lives’.

The first deportation flight with 7 passengers to Rwanda was arranged on 14^th June 2022. The European Court of Human Rights stepped in last minute to grant an urgent interim measure regarding an Iraqi national on the flight. This decision allowed the remaining six individuals to appeal against their removal orders, seeking to have them revoked. The UK challenged this ECtHR ruling and eventually, the appeal was dismissed. The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal on 15^th November 2023, on the grounds that Rwanda is not a safe country, and it would be unlawful for refugees to be removed there.

Twists and Turns of the Rwanda Bill

The UK government did not just stop here. Shortly after the decision of the Supreme Court, the government published an emergency bill declaring Rwanda a safe country, showing their determination to push its migrant deportation scheme to a further step in defiance of the courts. This is an attempt by the UK government to legislate a declaration regarding the facts that are not found by the court.

Many consider the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill itself to be a direct response from the government to the UK Supreme Court’s decision in November 2023, which held that Rwanda is not a safe country for asylum seekers due to the risk of refoulement, poor human rights records, and lack of judicial independence. The government defiantly introduced this bill as a means of preventing legal challenges that were placed from stopping or delaying a person’s removal to Rwanda.

After two years of wrangling, the bill designed to prevent small boat crossings in the English Channel finally became law. Tragically, only a few hours after the passing of the Rwanda Bill, French officials stated five people, including a seven-year-old girl, were found dead while trying to cross the English Channel on an overloaded boat with 122 migrants. Two people have now been arrested.

Migration Milestone

The passing of the bill is seen by the government as symbolic of the UK Parliament’s sovereignty and ensures that international law shall leave the Act of Parliament unaffected.

This new law was built upon the treaty between the government of the UK and Rwanda, and is one of the toughest pieces of immigration legislation introduced by the UK government. It confirms that Rwanda is safe on general ground, disapplies much of the Human Rights Act 1998 and holds that only a Minister of the Crown can decide whether to comply with the interim remedies issued by the ECtHR. The law leaves a narrow margin for individuals to challenge their removal decision and ensure the courts interprets the law in agreement with the will of Parliament.

The government has taken steady measures to ensure the operation of the plan. It increased the detention spaces to 2,200 and has 200 well-trained caseworkers and 25 courtrooms to process the claims timely and decisively, with around 800 trained individuals ready to assist the escort.

Once implemented, the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill will entail the immediate deportation of asylum seekers to Rwanda upon their asylum claim and they will not be able to return to the UK. It will also significantly curtail the ability of asylum seekers to challenge their decisions of removal considering the UK has legislated to declare Rwanda as a safe country to protect asylum seekers.

Moreover, it gives no room for the courts to have further doubt about Rwanda’s safety, with or without any evidence.

Step back from the rule of law

Vice-president of the Law Society Richard Atkinson believes this Rwanda Bill is a defective, constitutionally improper piece of legislation. It is disappointing to see that the sensible Lords amendments are ignored. He condemned this bill as a backward step from the rule of law, it sabotages the UK’s constitutional balance and limits access to justice.

The United Nations also expressed their worry given that this legislation empowered the UK government to disregard any protective remedies from the ECtHR. Such precedent lays a further departure of the UK from fulfilling its obligations to Refugee Conventions.

Nevertheless, this bill is not completely bulletproof. While Section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 disallows much of its application, Section 4 preserves an option to seek a declaration of incompatibility. This declaration, while not binding, holds political and moral weight and can potentially pave the way for further legal action in ECtHR.

Additionally, when the decision breaches an individual’s ECHR rights, recourse to the ECtHR provides an alternative avenue for challenging the Act’s compliance with ECHR rights. The ECtHR’s independent assessment is not bound by UK legislation or presumptions regarding Rwanda’s safety. However, Sunak stated no ‘foreign court’ will prevent flights from taking off. This would undoubtedly place the UK and the Strasbourg courts in confrontation.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Government backs down on scrapping ground rent – what is the alternative?

We previously brought you the news that the government were planning to bring an end to ground rent following a consultation, with a number of options on the table. A number of news organisations have now reported that Michael Gove’s ambition to reduce ground rent to a peppercorn rate has been blocked by both the Prime Minister and Chancellor. Instead, it looks as though a ground rent cap at a nominal level of £250 per year which is phased out over 20 years will be introduced as a potential compromise.

The Housing Secretary, Michael Gove, had previously stated that among the options, his preference was for ground rent to be reduced to a peppercorn amount. However, it seems that this has turned out to be false hope for leaseholders.

The Sunday Times, who have reported the announcement, revealed that the Housing Secretary’s plans to reduce ground rent to a peppercorn rate for existing leaseholds has been watered down due to lobbying from investors and pension funds which own many of the freeholds. These have traditionally been seen as a safe way of providing a steady income over time for pension funds. Opponents of the legislation have also argued that it would make investing in freeholds less attractive in the future.

Following a consultation on ground rent which we covered in a previous article here, analysis by The Treasury found that the financial impact of reducing ground rents to a peppercorn rate would cost in the range of somewhere between £15bn and £40bn. Many freeholders had reacted to the consultation by stating that without having a regular income from ground rent, many of them may be forced to exit the market.

The ground rent cap alternative

A ground rent cap of £250 per year may not have been the preferred choice of campaigners for leasehold reform, however many will be encouraged by progress on this area. This will ensure that ground rent is capped at a more managed number than had often been occurring previously. Despite this, the 20 year period mentioned in the briefings to the press will have the air of scrapping ground rent completely being ‘kicked into the long grass’.

A spokesperson for the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities has previously added: “It is not fair that many leaseholders face unregulated ground rents for no guaranteed service in return, and we remain committed to reducing ground rents to a peppercorn as set out in our 2019 manifesto.

“We recently consulted on a range of options to cap ground rents for existing residential leases, and we are carefully considering the responses before we make an announcement in due course.”

Solicitor’s thoughts

The backlash may be due to concerns that legislating to cap ground rents may expose the government to legal challenges, as it could conflict with the European Convention on Human Rights and English property ownership laws. The approach of disallowing something that was previously part of a contractual agreement is noted as a more direct method compared to past government actions involving asset expropriation through taxation. Depending on the outcome of the consultation, potential legal challenges may be predicted to be brought up.

What ground rent proposals were previously put forward?

A number of proposals were put forward in the consultation entitled Modern leasehold: restricting ground rent for existing leases. These include the following:

setting ground rents at a peppercorn
putting in place a maximum financial value which ground rents could never exceed
capping ground rents at a percentage of the property value
limiting ground rent in existing leases to the original amount when the lease was granted
freezing ground rent at current levels

The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Bill is currently making its way through Parliament, and is currently at the committee stage in the House of Lords. There are an estimated 4.98 million leasehold properties in England according to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. This makes up approximately 20% of the English housing stock overall.

Further communication about the exact proposal for ground rents under the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Bill is expected this week. This will confirm whether the proposed ground rent cap will indeed be introduced. Stay tuned and subscribe to our newsletter for further updates.

Have questions about this article? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, our phone lines are open and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

Or, download our free app! You can launch an enquiry, scan over documents, check progress on your case and much more!

James Cook

See Full Bio

The Innovator Founder Visa – a guide for applicants

The UK has a rich entrepreneurial spirit, with the likes of Richard Branson, Alan Sugar, and James Dyson all household names from the UK. It also has a proud history of welcoming immigrants to its shores, many of whom have founded successful businesses, whether locally or at a national level. The Innovator Founder Visa is designed to attract the best and the brightest to the UK by encouraging start-up entrepreneurs and experienced business people to establish their new business here.

Formally known as the Innovator visa, the Innovator Founder Visa gives far more flexibility to innovators while retaining the requirement for an innovative business idea with sufficient funds to deliver on it.

Let’s take a look at the requirements of the Innovator Founder Visa.

Basic eligibility requirements

Firstly, the basics. The Innovator Founder Visa is a specialised type of visa as the innovative business you must set up and run in the UK must be one which is different from anything else on the market.

The creation of an Innovator Founder visa business plan will play a crucial role in determining whether you gain their endorsement. The business plan must demonstrate that your business has potential for growth and be scalable – meaning that you must give evidence that your business will create jobs and have the potential for growing into national and international markets.

You also need an endorsing body to assess your business under the above requirements. These include the following organisations:

Innovator International
Envestors Limited
UK Endorsement Services (UKES)
The Global Entrepreneurs Programme (GEP)

It is also vital that you are able to speak, read, write and understand English. You may be asked to prove this, however if you are a national of one of the following countries then it won’t be required.

Financial requirements

You must have the funds to support yourself, as well any dependents while you are in the UK. This means that before you apply, extend or switch to an Innovator Founder visa, you must have had at least £1270 in your bank account for 28 consecutive days. If you have a partner, this is an additional £285. For a child, it’s £315. For every additional child, it’s an extra £200 for each child.

When it comes to extending or switching, this requirement is only necessary if you have been in the UK for less than a year.

As of June 2025, the current fee for an Innovator Founder Visa is £1,274 if you are applying from outside the UK. If you are applying from within the UK by switching from another category, the fee will be £1,590.

How long will your visa last?

The initial period your Innovator Founder visa will be valid for is 3 years. However, it is possible to extend it for 3 years at a time subject to you meeting the requirements. After 3 years, it is possible to apply for indefinite leave to remain as an Innovator Founder.

What documents will you need to provide?

Like all visa route, a number of documents must be provided. These include:

An endorsement letter from one of the endorsing bodies listed above
A valid passport, or another type of document which shows your nationality or identity
Bank statements showing at least £1270 in your bank account for 28 consecutive days before applying
Proof of your English language proficiency
Your tuberculosis test results must also be provided if you are from a country where you must take the test

How can you apply from outside the UK?

To apply for an Innovator Founder visa from outside the UK, you must apply online and have the above documents with you.

You must also prove your identity. The manner in which you can do this will depend on the country you are from and the type of passport that you have.

To get a biometric residence permit, you will either need to:

Have your biometrics (fingerprints and photograph) taken at a visa application centre
Or, you can use the UK Immigration: ID Check app to scan your identity document by create or signing into the UK Visas and Immigration account

How long does a decision take?

After applying online, providing documents, and proving your identity, a decision will usually be given within 3 weeks. If it will take longer, then you will be contacted about the reason why.

You may be able to get a faster decision using the priority or the super priority service. Priority will provide a decision within five working days, while super priority will provide a decision by the end of the next working day. This will be extended to 2 working days after if your appointment or document submission is at the weekend or on a bank holiday. This will cost an extra £500 for priority and an extra £1000 for super priority respectively.

Want to switch to an Innovator Founder Visa?

Much of the above applies if you wish to switch to an Innovator Founder Visa from another type of visa. However, there are a number of visas you cannot switch from. These include:

Visit visa
Short-term student visa
Parent of a Child Student visa
Seasonal worker visa
Domestic worker in a private household visa
Immigration bail
Permission to stay outside the immigration rules, such as on compassionate grounds

When switching to an Innovator Founder Visa, you will usually get a decision within 8 weeks of your application date.

Looking to apply for an innovator founder visa? Contact us today and we will be happy to help as well as answer any additional questions.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

UK eVisa, what is it?

An eVisa is how you prove your immigration status in 2025. Physical documents like BRPs and vignettes will be replaced by eVisas, which will remain valid until their expiry date on 31 December 2024.

If your status was granted for a longer period, it will not be affected by the expiry date of your physical document.

Earlier this month, we published an article confirming that the UK eVisa system is now live. All holders of BRP cards are recommended to sign up for this platform as it grants you the right to live in the UK continuously.

As a reminder to all those with dependants, you must ensure that all members of your family register for the e-visa.

Your eVisa is an online record of your immigration status and will show the conditions of your permission to enter or stay. To access your eVisa and share your immigration status with third parties, you must create a UKVI account if you do not already have one.

Your eVisa will be linked to your passport or travel documents, allowing border force to automatically verify your status. For more information, check out this link created by the Home Office.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

High Court refuses to reverse divorce order which was applied for by mistake

Imagine accidentally being divorced and unable to reverse it. This unfortunate scenario happened when a staff member at the law firm, Vardag’s, went to apply for a final divorce order for a client, but accidentally opened the file of Mr and Mrs Williams. Just 21 minutes later, the wrong couple was divorced.

Mr and Mrs Williams had separated in January 2023 after 22 years of marriage when Mrs Williams filed an application for divorce. Her solicitors then used the online portal to apply for a final order of divorce in error, before discovering their mistake 2 days later. Despite them applying for the order to be set aside, claiming that they were still married, the husband did not accept this and went to the High Court.

The High Court ruled last week that despite the error made by the solicitor who selected the wrong client, the final order for divorce must be upheld. They added that there was no precedent for the overturning of an order where there is no procedural irregularity. Sir Andrew McFarlane, president of the Family Division, stated: ‘There is a strong public policy interest in respecting the certainty and finality that flows from a final divorce order and maintaining the status quo that it has established.” By setting aside the finality of this order, he added that it risks a party claiming that an application for divorce was made by mistake.

Final orders for divorce are made using the HM Courts and Tribunal online divorce portal, part of a range of measures which have been brought in to simplify divorce in the UK. However, Ayesha Vardag, the founder of Vardag’s, criticised the lack of checks when using the platform, outlining that the mistake was as simple as clicking the wrong name on a drop-down menu.

She added: “The courts shouldn’t change people’s marital status based on a slip on an online portal. Whether the person makes the slip themselves or their lawyer does. It goes against the principle of intention which suffuses our law. It’s absurd that we can have orders amended under the “slip rule” and everyone understands it happens, but when it’s a slip on the portal it’s set in stone.”

Known as the ‘Diva of divorce’, Vardag has acted on behalf of a number of high status and high net worth individuals in settlements worth tens of millions of pounds. She and her firm have pledged their full support to the staff member who made the mistake.

Our thoughts

The nature of the relationship between the solicitor and the client means that in this situation, there was nothing that the client could do to remedy the situation. The judge had already issued a conditional order before, and there was no procedural irregularity as previously explained. The act of applying for a final order for divorce is very simple, with no detailed check at this final stage of the process.

Divorce process stages

In the majority of cases, the process of applying for divorce is simple as long as you and your spouse both agree to divorce and cooperate. with the Court proceedings. The stages and timeframes in the process include the following:

To start a divorce, we (on your behalf, the applicant) will need to file an application with the Court.
After the Court has issued your divorce application, the Court will send the application to your spouse (the respondent), where the respondent has to say whether or not they intend to dispute the divorce etc.
Applying for the Conditional Order, the application for such an order cannot be submitted to the Court unless 20 weeks have elapsed from the issue of proceedings (not submission).
Applying for the Final Order, you will have to wait a further six weeks after the date of the conditional order to apply for the final divorce order.

– The overall timeframe for divorce proceedings is around 10 to 12 months. This can vary depending on the current timescales. and workload of the Court.

– Please note that financial and children arrangements may delay the process further.

Do I need to divide the matrimonial assets in a divorce?

Financial settlement legal processes are completely separate from the divorce itself. Once you start your divorce; it is strongly advisable to deal with your financial matters at the same time to avoid unexpected claims from your former spouse in the future. If you are able to reach a mutually acceptable agreement on the finance division, you may wish to apply to the Court to endorse your agreement in order to obtain a clean break. This can be achieved by applying for a Consent Order.

When filing a Consent Order, the Court requires full and frank disclosure of your assets, liabilities and income from both of you to ensure that your agreement is fair. It is important to note that a Consent Order for divorce can only be applied once the Conditional Order is made. If you and your spouse are unable to agree on the terms, you can negotiate with the help of solicitors, attend mediation or apply for a financial order in Court. Please note that the Court will not make a binding financial order unless you or the respondent ask it to, or unless your separate financial court proceedings have reached a conclusion.

If you have any questions regarding divorce proceedings or financial settlement, feel free to contact us.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Removal of Absence Requirement Marks New Era for 10-Year Settlement Applications – our analysis is proved right

Last month, we published an article following the release of the latest statement of changes to the Immigration Rules: HC 590, which was issued on March 14 2024. In this article, we made observations about the absence of any mention that applicants for 10-year settlement must not exceed 548 days away after living in the UK lawfully for 10 years. We can now confirm that this analysis was correct.

The statement of changes listed a number of new proposals, most importantly the introduction of appendix long residence.

An application under long residence is used by those who have stayed in the UK lawfully for 10 years which could have been via a combination of different visas. The statements stated that there would be the introduction of Appendix Long Residence and the removal of paragraph 276, part 7 from the immigration rules.

Before this big change, people wanting to settle in the UK had strict rules to follow. If they were away from the UK for more than 548 days in total over 10 years, or for more than 184 days at once, they couldn’t apply for settlement. However, we noticed something important when we looked at the new rules: there was no mention of absences relating to the 548 days. This wasn’t stated in the statement of changes and no reference was given in appendix continuous residence.

This would mean that as of 11^th April 2024, all those who have been prevented from applying for ILR due to exceeding absences for over 548 days will no longer be prevented from applying for settlement. We have seen over the past year that this has affected many people who were stranded abroad during the pandemic and promptly made our observations known. We can now confirm that following the release of the new appendix long residence, our analysis was indeed correct and there is no such requirement. Please note that the absence requirement of not being absent from the UK for 180 days at any given time still applies.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Should you enter a cohabitation agreement with your partner?

In today’s society, unmarried cohabitation is not uncommon. In the UK, there is no so-called “common law marriage”, which exists in other countries. Cohabiting couples do not have the protection of legal couples, and the issue of money can become a very sensitive one. Many decide to enter a cohabitation agreement as a solution to this problem. But why should you enter one?

A new study has found that one in five (21%) Brits have had their relationships break up due to financial misunderstandings. 41% of those surveyed said they lose sleep due to the stress of money issues. Couples find it difficult to have open and honest discussions with each other while hoping to protect their assets.

We discussed why you should look to enter into a cohabitation agreement in a previous article here. Let’s look at what it actually is here.

What is a cohabitation agreement?

A cohabitation agreement is a written document, usually signed as a deed in front of witnesses, and it generally involves three main aspects:

Who owns (or owes) what at the time of the agreement, and in what proportion?
What financial arrangements you decide to make while living together, and
If you break up, how will property, assets, and income be divided?

If the agreement is well drafted, has reasonable terms, and both of you have obtained independent legal advice on the validity of the agreement, the courts are more likely to uphold the agreement in the event of a dispute.

Whether you are about to start living together or have been living together for several years, you can enter into a cohabitation agreement at any time. Your family lawyer can help you negotiate the agreement and write it down so it is respected by the courts in the event of a dispute. Many couples also find that the process of entering into a cohabitation agreement means they have the opportunity to think about and discuss how to live together financially, which means there is less chance of arguments over money later on.

What might you want drafted in a cohabitation agreement?

Shared house

If you buy a property together, the cohabitation agreement can list the shared property, but it is important to record who owns the home and whether there are any separate agreements or commitments that are not reflected in the legal document. Who is paying the mortgage? If there are any endowment insurance or other savings arrangements associated with the mortgage, what are the contribution limits for those insurance or savings arrangements? Do you want to insure each other’s lives? Your family lawyer may need to advise you on the implications of a shared home arrangement, as this is often the most complex issue faced by cohabitants.

Money and bill payments

Many people find it convenient to have a joint bank account when living together, but they need to decide how much to contribute to the account. Are the contributions equal? If not equal, would you consider the money in the joint account to be jointly owned? What will the joint account be used for, and when should your individual accounts be used? If not using a joint account, who pays for which of the household bills? What about credit cards and debt?

Pension

Pensions are often overlooked and can sometimes give you the opportunity to provide for your loved ones. For example, you may wish to agree on a nomination for line of duty death benefit.

Personal property

You should consider who owns and/or will keep items such as furniture and cars, and ideally work out now ownership rules for important items, or ways to resolve any disagreements in the event of separation.

Child

Although not legally binding, it is worth considering whether you would be willing to provide support for any children (for example, school or college fees) above and beyond the minimum standards set out by the child support system if you separated set some expectations on how to care for your children.

Legal rules may change in the future, and the specific rights granted to cohabitants will also change accordingly. In addition, the circumstances of both parties will change. For example, if you move, suddenly have a child, or other major changes occur, you may need to revisit the agreement, and it’s important to make sure it’s up to date.

Cohabiting couples who are not married should also create a will so that if you die while you are living with someone else, your wishes will be carried out. While it is possible for cohabitants to inherit in certain circumstances, there are no strict rules so you must be clear about your wishes.

At Lisa’s Law, we regularly help young couples with cohabitation agreements. Contact us today to get started.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Have a question? Our friendly and experienced team are here to help.

Subscribe to our newsletter

We post weekly articles covering a variety of topics, including immigration, property, and more, so subscribe to our newsletter for the latest updates.