Rachel Reeves Reportedly Considers End to Stamp Duty: Regional Winners, Losers, and Market Implications

The debate on UK housing taxation has reignited following reports that Chancellor Rachel Reeves is considering major reforms ahead of the UK Autumn Budget. One of the proposals reportedly being considered by Reeves includes replacing buyer-side stamp duty with a national property tax levied on sellers of homes worth more than £500,000, and the possible reintroduction of capital gains tax (CGT) on main residences sold for over £1.5 million.

While these ideas remain under discussion, their potential impact across different regions and on homeowners is already raising concern.

Easing Buyers, Burdening Sellers

Stamp duty has long been criticised as a “deal killer,” making transactions more expensive and discouraging mobility. By shifting the responsibility to sellers, the Treasury could make it easier for first-time buyers and families to step onto or move up the property ladder. But this new tax would not replace stamp duty on second homes or investments properties. Furthermore, the relief for purchasers would be offset by new costs for sellers, particularly in London and the South East where property prices often exceed the £500,000 threshold.

Regional impact

The effects would not be evenly spread. According to Rightmove, nearly 60% of homes in London are listed above £500,000, compared with just 8% in the North East. At the £1.5 million CGT threshold, London again dominates, accounting for 11% of listings and around 5% of sales. By contrast, such high-value properties are almost non-existent in northern regions. This disparity suggests the reforms would disproportionately impact homeowners in the South, potentially widening the north–south divide.

Behavioural impact

The behavioural consequences could also be significant. If sellers face new taxes, some may hold back from moving, particularly those considering downsizing. This would reduce the supply of larger family homes and could push prices higher in already overheated markets. First-time buyers might benefit from lower upfront costs, but in practice could face higher asking prices as a result of tighter supply.

Warnings from the industry

Industry experts are urging caution. Sarah Coles of Hargreaves Lansdown notes that families should not make hasty decisions based on speculation, pointing out that moving home is as much a life choice as it is a financial one. Rightmove’s CEO Johan Svanstrom has also warned that significant tax changes risk undermining market liquidity and limiting opportunities for workers and young families.

How homeowners can prepare

Sellers of homes worth between £500,000 and £1.5 million should model their potential net proceeds under both the current and possible future systems.
Owners of higher-value homes may wish to gather evidence of purchase costs and improvements in case CGT becomes payable.
Buyers should remain cautious: while they may save on stamp duty, increased demand and reduced supply could outweigh the benefits.

Our view

Reeves’ proposals reflect the government’s pressing fiscal needs. With a commitment not to raise income tax, VAT or national insurance, housing has become the next logical target. While shifting the burden from buyers to sellers could help some purchasers, the policy may backfire if sellers simply increase asking prices or avoid selling altogether. This would reduce supply and risk making housing even less affordable, particularly in London.

The question of fairness is also complex. Despite regional economic disparities, homeowners in the South may feel they are being unfairly singled out, while many parts of the North would remain largely unaffected, potentially deepening regional divides.

In reality, this appears more like a short-term revenue measure than a long-term solution. A meaningful reform would involve updating council tax, which is still based on 1991 valuations, and creating a fairer system that reflects today’s property market.

Conclusion: Why legal advice matters

These proposals highlight how quickly property tax rules can change. Whether you are buying or selling, the amount of tax you pay – and how much you ultimately keep could look very different in the near future. Buying or selling a home is often one of life’s most important financial decisions, and having the right guidance is essential.

As specialist property lawyers, we can explain the latest rules, identify hidden risks in contracts, and assess how new taxes might affect your transaction. We will also ensure your documentation is watertight and that you are fully protected if reforms are introduced.

If you are planning a move, having a trusted solicitor by your side is the safest way to navigate these changes with confidence. We are here to help – please feel free to contact us at info@lisaslaw.co.uk for tailored advice and support.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

Recent Immigration Tribunal Decisions: BNO Applications and Biometric Residence Permits

Two recent immigration tribunal decisions have highlighted important points of principle in UK immigration law: the requirement for procedural fairness in decision-making and the legal distinction between a grant of leave and the administrative issuance of a Biometric Residence Permit (BRP).

Both cases demonstrate the need for applicants and their representatives to be vigilant in challenging decisions where the Home Office may have acted outside established legal boundaries.

Procedural Fairness in Hong Kong BN(O) Applications

In R (KW) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, JR-2024-LON-002169, the Upper Tribunal considered a refusal under the Hong Kong British National (Overseas) route. The applicant, a Chinese national from Hong Kong, had been refused on the basis of a previous conviction. The Home Office gave decisive weight to a Hong Kong Court of Appeal judgment it had located independently online, without putting this material to the applicant for comment.

The Tribunal found this to be a clear breach of procedural fairness, observing that the applicant had effectively been “ambushed” by evidence not disclosed to them.

While the Court of Appeal’s decision in Balajigari v Home Secretary [2019] EWCA Civ 673 was not directly applicable, it was considered a useful authority on fairness in immigration decision-making. The refusal was therefore quashed, and the case must now be reconsidered by the Home Office.

This judgment reinforces that applicants must be given an opportunity to respond to any evidence relied upon by decision-makers. Failure to do so will amount to procedural unfairness, providing strong grounds for judicial review.

The Legal Status of Biometric Residence Permits

The second case, Guerrero (s104(4A); statutory abandonment; right of appeal) [2025] UKUT 00276 (IAC), concerned an asylum seeker who received a refusal decision but was subsequently issued with a BRP stating “Refugee leave to remain.”

The First-tier Tribunal initially ruled that the BRP constituted a grant of leave, thereby treating the pending asylum appeal as abandoned under section 104(4A) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.

On appeal, the Upper Tribunal clarified the legal position. A BRP does not in itself grant leave to remain, it is an administrative document that evidences an earlier grant of leave.

Where a BRP is issued in error, no grant of leave arises, and an appeal cannot be deemed abandoned.

The Tribunal also confirmed that decisions to treat appeals as abandoned under section 104(4A) are not “excluded decisions,” and therefore fall within the Upper Tribunal’s jurisdiction to review.

The First-tier Tribunal’s decision was set aside, and the case will be re-heard.

This decision underscores the importance of distinguishing between the substantive grant of leave and the administrative issuance of a BRP. Mistaken issuance of documents cannot override statutory rights of appeal.

Conclusion

Both cases serve as reminders of the importance of legal safeguards in the immigration system when it comes to immigration tribunal decisions. The KW case highlights that applicants must be given a fair opportunity to respond to evidence before adverse decisions are made. The Guerrero case confirms that a BRP is not determinative of immigration status and cannot substitute for an actual grant of leave.

These judgments illustrate the value of expert legal representation in holding the Home Office to account where decision-making falls short of the standards required by law.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

Tenant vs Landlord: Who is Responsible for Rental Property Repairs in the UK?

A recent enquiry from a tenant highlighted a common problem in rented accommodation. The tenant experienced a bathroom leak in her university flat, something which a tenant would normally expect to be dealt with by the landlord. However, the landlord requested for the tenant to cover the costs of repairs, including fire alarm servicing and replacement of carpets and mattresses.

This raises a key question for tenants across the UK: When is the tenant responsible for repair costs, and when should the landlord bear them?

Rental Property Repairs in the UK

Under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, landlords have a legal duty to maintain the structure and facilities of a rented property. A landlord’s repairs obligations apply to tenancies with fixed terms of less than 7 years and such obligations cannot be excluded by contract by landlords.

Their repair obligations include:

The property structure and exterior
Heating, hot water, and plumbing systems
Sanitation and electrical installations

Tenants are expected to:

Use the property responsibly
Report any issues promptly
Allow access for necessary repairs

When Tenants May Be Responsible for Rental Property Repairs

Tenants may be required to pay for rental property repairs if damage results from their negligence or misuse, for example:

Leaving taps running, causing water damage
Blocking drains with inappropriate items
Ignoring landlord warnings or failing to report issues that worsen over time

In these cases, tenants may be responsible for repair costs, but it depends on the specific circumstances.

Assessing the Bathroom Leak Enquiry

In the enquiry above, liability depends on whether the tenant contributed to the leak:

Tenant Negligence: If taps were left running, drains were blocked, or warnings ignored, the tenant could be responsible.
No Tenant Fault: If the leak occurred during normal use, the landlord is typically responsible. Such incidents are often covered by the property’s insurance.

Tenants should always challenge unfair claims and provide evidence showing they acted responsibly.

Legal Options for Tenants

If a landlord makes an unjustified claim, tenants can:

Raise a Dispute Directly: Communicate with the landlord or letting agent.
Seek Advice: Contact organisations such as Citizens Advice for guidance.
Defend the Claim in Court: For low-value disputes, representing yourself in the small claims court can be cost-effective. Courts often encourage self-representation.

New residents or students may feel nervous about court proceedings, but UK judges are approachable and allow parties to present their cases clearly. If language is a barrier, a friend can assist as an interpreter.

Conclusion

Understanding your rights as a tenant is essential. In most cases, landlords are responsible for maintaining the property, and tenants should not be held liable for repairs caused by normal wear and tear. If a landlord makes an unfair claim, tenants should assert their rights and seek legal advice.

For expert guidance on UK tenancy repair responsibilities, tenant and landlord legal advice, and property litigation and tenancy disputes, contact our Residential Property and Litigation teams. We specialise in helping tenants and landlords navigate UK housing law and resolve disputes efficiently.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

Two New Solicitors Join Lisa’s Law

We are delighted to welcome two highly-skilled new colleagues to our conveyancing department at Lisa’s Law. As qualified solicitors, Alisha and Billy bolster the ranks of our thriving conveyancing team and help to continue providing an excellent service to our clients.

Read all about Alisha and Billy in our welcome article below!

Alisha

Alisha qualified as a Solicitor in 2024, deciding to specialise in residential property after gaining extensive experience in residential property matters since 2017. She enjoys helping clients during what can often be a stressful but exciting time.

Her work includes all aspects of residential transactions – from freehold and leasehold sales and purchases to re-mortgages and transfers of equity. She can also deal with landlord and tenant matters, such as lease extensions.

Outside of the office, Alisha enjoys travelling, getting lost in a good book, and keeping active with yoga and other fitness activities.

Billy

Billy completed the Diploma in Legal Studies at the University of Hong Kong, School of Professional and Continuing Education in 2004, which qualified him as a legal executive in the HKSAR. He later obtained his law degree from Nottingham Trent University in 2012. In 2022, he completed the Legal Practice Course (LPC) with distinction at Cardiff University.

After working as a paralegal at a small London firm specialising in residential conveyancing, Billy secured a training contract and was admitted as a Solicitor in England and Wales in April 2025. He is planning to undertake the Notarial Practice Course at University College London, with the goal of qualifying as a Notary Public in the future.

Billy previously worked for over a decade as a legal executive in Hong Kong in general practice, covering civil litigation, family law, and wills and probate. In the UK, Billy has focused primarily on residential conveyancing, while also assisting with certain civil litigation matters.

Billy is fluent in English and Cantonese.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

When consent isn’t free: PN v SA and the Family Court’s evolving approach to coercion in nuptial agreements

At first glance, the case reads like many others that passes through the Family Court: an ultra-high-net-worth husband (H) and wife (W), both of Middle Eastern origin, disputing the enforceability of a post-nuptial agreement signed during their marriage.

But beneath the numbers – a £230 million award to W, one of the largest ever made – lies a deeper question: what does it mean to give consent, freely and fairly, in the context of a relationship shaped by dependence, pressure, and imbalance? Let’s take a closer look at this case and coercion in nuptial agreements more generally.

What was the dispute really about?

H and W met in 1999, married in 2003, and had four children together. H controlled vast wealth held in offshore structures, while W had no significant personal assets or independent income. As the marriage progressed, W became increasingly emotionally, financially, and practically reliant on her husband.

Two post-nuptial agreements were at issue: one signed in 2021, and another proposed in 2023. In both, W was asked to give up substantial financial claims in the event of divorce. She did so. But years later, she challenged the enforceability of those agreements, arguing that her consent had not been freely given.

The Family Court agreed.

What stood out was not a single act of force or a moment of duress, but something more insidious: the cumulative effect of sustained emotional pressure. There were no overt threats, but the control was constant.

Why is this case significant?

Since Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42, the courts have supported the use of nuptial agreements, provided they are entered into freely, with understanding, and are fair at the time of enforcement. But PN v SA marks a shift. Here, the court focused not just on the fairness of the financial terms, but on how those terms were agreed.

Mrs Justice Knowles found that W’s autonomy had been worn down over time. H persistently questioned her loyalty, delayed and obstructed her access to legal advice, and conditioned her financial security, and, by implication, that of their children, on her signing the agreement.

It was, as the court recognised, a slow, steady erosion of the ability to say no.

When does pressure become coercion?

There is, of course, a line. Families, particularly those with generational wealth, routinely discuss trusts, succession, and asset protection. A degree of persuasion is to be expected. But in PN v SA, the court found that H crossed that line.

H disparaged W’s trusted advisers. He threatened financial consequences if she resisted. He also created an atmosphere in which compliance felt like the only safe option. That, the court held, invalidated the foundation of consent.

The agreement may have looked procedurally sound. But voluntariness cannot be ticked off a checklist, it must be real, not just apparent.

What should families take away?

This case is not an attack on nuptial agreements. Far from it. But it is a reminder that formality is not enough. Legal advice, disclosure, and cooling-off periods are necessary safeguards, but they cannot rescue a process that is fundamentally coercive.

For practitioners, this means:

Focus on substance, not just process. Even a procedurally correct agreement may be set aside if the emotional context was compromised.
Be alert to subtle forms of pressure. Coercion does not always look aggressive. It may sound like flattery, dependence, or even concern.
Support both parties. The more vulnerable spouse must have genuine access to advice, space, and security.

Record the journey. Contemporary notes of legal advice, capacity assessments, and the atmosphere surrounding discussions may all prove crucial later.

A broader shift in the law?

PN v SA reflects something larger: a growing judicial awareness of the unseen forces that can shape human behaviour. From financial remedy cases to child arrangements, courts are increasingly tuned in to the invisible scaffolding of emotional control.

This is not a new principle. Equity has long resisted enforcement of agreements procured through dominance. But the lens is now more psychologically informed, more culturally nuanced, and more willing to ask uncomfortable questions about what “freely given” really means.

Final thoughts

Nuptial agreements remain vital tools for protecting wealth, clarifying expectations, and avoiding litigation. But they only work when both parties are genuinely free to decline their terms.

PN v SA reframes the legal conversation around consent. It reminds us that control is not always loud, and coercion is not always violent.

In the end, the question was not simply whether W signed. It was whether she was free to choose.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

Case Study: Family Reunion for Dependent Over 18 years Old

We were recently instructed by a client who wished to apply for a family reunion for their adult child who lived in the sponsor’s country of origin. Our client’s child was 20 years old when we made the application.

Our involvement (what we did)

We confirmed that a child over 18 years old can rely on Family Reunion Protection to apply to join their parents in the UK, but it has to be under exceptional circumstances. The exceptional circumstances include but are not limited to: whether the child is leading an independent life; whether the parents they rely on have already travelled to the UK; whether the child in the sponsor’s country of origin has no other relatives to provide adequate support, and they could not access support or employment in the country of origin and would therefore likely become destitute if left on their own; and whether the child still extensively relies on the parents financially and emotionally.

Documentation provided to support the family reunion case

We prepared extensive documentation to demonstrate the parents’ active involvement in their child’s life, as well as the strong emotional and financial support they have consistently provided while the child is living overseas.

This includes but is not limited to: a consistent record of bank transactions, proof of bank transfer for the child’s education, and daily conversation between the parents and their child to show the guidance the parents provided to the child, and a strong emotional bond in the daily interaction.

Moreover, the child is currently studying at a university where parental involvement is required. The university does not allow students to leave the campus during term time unless permission is granted by their parents. Such permission can only be issued via the guardian’s registered mobile phone. This is key evidence to prove that the parents are still in control of the child’s life, and they are the people who make key decisions for the child.

Current caregiver unable to provide level of care required

Our client’s child was being looked after by his grandfather in the home country. However, the grandfather does not have the capacity to take care of the child anymore as he suffers from multiple chronic illnesses that require long-term medication and regular medical treatment.

Given his health condition, he is no longer capable of providing the level of care that the child requires. As the child is still in an important stage of personal development, stable and ongoing support from the parents with respects to guidance in education, future career decisions, financial management and personal wellbeing is essential.

We have therefore provided sufficient medical documentation to confirm that the grandfather, who is the child’s only caregiver in the home country, is no longer capable of fulfilling this responsibility. We also highlighted the necessity of the parents’ presence in the child’s life.

The dependant has been granted entry clearance under Appendix FRP. We wish them all the best in their education and their future.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

Understanding Building Disrepair Reports: Essential Insights for Legal Cases

As a litigation department, we have dealt with many building disrepair dispute cases across the years. Often, there are questions and confusions raised by clients on building disrepair reports and expert evidence under part 35 Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).

Is this the same as a home survey? And how does it assist the case? We seek to clarify some of the questions in the article here.

Part 35 CPR rules

From experience, in most disrepair cases, liability relies on Expert Evidence. The CPR pre-action protocol encourages parties to agree on a single joint expert. If this is not feasible, they may instruct separate experts who then collaborate via a joint Scott Schedule.

Part 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules governs expert reports, including survey reports for disrepair, outlining the duty to the court and the required content of such reports. Notably, it is the duty of experts to help the court on matters within their expertise, and this duty overrides any obligation to the person from whom experts have received instructions or by whom they are paid (CPR35.3).

Expert Witness Survey

In tenant and landlord disputes, when a landlord receives a disrepair claim, it is usually good practice for them to instruct a surveyor to carry out an inspection. This is a detailed inspection conducted by a qualified surveyor or building specialist to identify and record the condition of a property where there are concerned about disrepair, maintenance, and/or structural issues.

The expert should then produce a report which complies with part 35. This includes preparing a pre-action protocol compliant schedule of works (or a Scott Schedule). The schedule provides proposed start and completion dates.

These surveys are especially important in disputes where tenants claim that reported issues have not been properly resolved. They can also assist landlords in verifying that their properties meet quality standards.

The key points the survey should include are:

Every defect alleged is thoroughly covered in the report
Specify whether the alleged item falls within the landlord’s repair obligations

If a repair is necessary, the report should confirm whether it falls under the landlord’s responsibilities as outlined in the tenancy agreement, Section 9, 10, or 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1989, or Section 4 of the Defective Premises Act 1972.

Identify the cause of defect

This is crucial. The report should explain why the repair is needed. For example, if dampness is involved, the cause must be identified. It is also important to note if the defect results from tenant damage, as this could potentially be recharged to the tenant.

Include additional items for necessary repairs

After addressing the repairs alleged, a comprehensive property inspection should be conducted to identify any other necessary repairs. These should be documented separately from the defects outlined in the claim.

Include estimated costs for Scott Schedule or Schedule of Works

It should include the estimated costs of each repair. Providing these figures is important for all parties to understand the value of the repairs and to facilitate the resolution of the claim.

Finally, we remind parties that the expert witness evidence shall comply with the required formality under Part 35 (CPR 35.10) and that should the party wish to call the expert to give witness, they must first apply for permission of the court.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

Overheating in New Build Homes: What UK Buyers Need to Know Before Purchasing

In recent years, a growing number of UK homeowners have been shocked to discover overheating in new build homes, causing their flats to turn into makeshift ovens during the summer. Reports show that in some developments, inside temperatures can reach over 30°C – and during long heatwaves, nearly 35°C.

Last year, a block of flats in Tower Hamlets went viral for a piece of paper stuck to the windows of a flat with the message: “Do not buy these flats. Too hot.” A year later, residents in these flats say that heat is still an issue in the summer. This is a recurring theme across many new build properties in the UK, which are often designed to keep heat in, rather than keep it out.

This isn’t just uncomfortable – it can also affect health, sleep quality, and even the long-term usability of a property. So, why are UK new build homes overheating, and what should buyers look out for?

Why Overheating Happens in New-Builds

While modern homes are designed to be energy-efficient, many features intended to keep heat in during winter can work against you in summer. Common causes include:

Large windows without shading – Large glass panels let in sunlight, but also heat.
Tightly sealed homes – Good for keeping warm in winter, but heat can’t escape in summer.
Outdated design priorities – Regulations have historically focused on retaining warmth, with less emphasis on cooling in hot weather.
Poor ventilation – Energy-efficient designs often reduce airflow, allowing heat to build up inside.

With climate change leading to hotter summers and more frequent heatwaves, these design weaknesses are more common.

What to Ask Before Purchasing

When viewing a new-build, check more than just how it looks:

Orientation of rooms: South or west facing spaces often receive more intense afternoon sun.
Heat-reducing features: Are there blinds, shutters, tinted glazing, or roof overhangs to limit solar gain?
Ventilation: Does it have a system to move fresh air in summer?
Landscaping plans – Will trees or greenery be planted to provide natural shade?
Regulatory compliance: Developers should be able to show you compliance with Part O of Building Regulations (rules introduced to tackle overheating in new homes).

Rights and Protections for Buyers

Most newly built homes come with certain safeguards, including:

Structural warranties – Often lasting 10 years, these may be provided by bodies such as NHBC, LABC Warranty, or Premier Guarantee.
- The first two years typically require the builder to correct most faults.
- Years 3–10: covers major structural issues (though overheating is unlikely to be covered unless it stems from a design fault).

Consumer protection codes – Many developers follow the Consumer Code for Home Builders or the New Homes Quality Code. These require fair treatment, honest information, and access to dispute resolution.
The New Homes Ombudsman – You can complain here if your builder is registered.

If You’re Already Struggling with Overheating

If you already own a property affected by excessive heat, you may wish to:

Fit reflective blinds or solar-control film to windows, or purchase a portable air conditioning unit.
Raise issues with your developer while you’re still in the 2-year defect period.
Keep detailed records of temperature readings and the effect on your living conditions to support any formal complaint.

Final Thoughts

A well-designed modern home should remain comfortable year-round. With UK summers getting hotter, buyers must assess a property’s ability to resist overheating, just as they would check insulation or damp issues. By asking the right questions, ensuring regulatory compliance, and understanding your rights, you can reduce the risk of buying a home that’s warm and cosy in winter but unbearably hot in summer.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

Successful Spouse Visa Case Study – Couple Reunited After 8 Years

We recently helped a client to apply for a UK spouse visa from outside the UK so she could finally reunite with her husband. The couple had maintained a long-distance relationship for 8 years, much of it while living in different countries.

The couple originally met while the applicant was visiting the UK on a standard visitor visa. Their connection quickly grew as they travelled across the country together.

However, their relationship was to be disrupted by the fact that our client had to return to China before her visa expired. Nevertheless, the couple continued their relationship across borders, visiting each other regularly in both the UK and China. Eventually, they married in China and made the decision to settle permanently in the UK together.

How did we help our client with the spouse visa application?

We advised the client to apply for a spouse visa from outside the UK. Although both our client and her husband were unemployed, we guided them through meeting the financial requirement using their personal savings. We helped prepare documents included bank statements to show adequate savings, marriage certificate and travel documentation, photographs, messages to demonstrate a genuine relationship, and an English language test certificate. Finally, the applicant also provided the Tuberculosis (TB) test results as required for overseas applications.

What was the outcome of the application?

The application was successful. The client has been granted leave to enter the UK as a spouse, allowing her to reunite with her husband and begin their life together after eight years of maintaining a long-distance relationship.

Read our guide to the spouse visa here.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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 Supreme Court Rules on Secret Car Finance Commission: What It Means for Buyers

In the UK, it’s common for car dealers to connect customers with lenders so that the car can be purchased on finance, with the lender paying a commission to the dealer. While most car buyers choose to finance their purchase, it’s vital for customers to understand the duties and responsibilities owed to them by both the dealer and the lender. This knowledge can help protect them in situations that may feel unfair, particularly where there is a suspicion of bribery or improper incentives.

When purchasing a car through hire purchase, many individuals will have been unwitting participants in a scheme whereby the higher the interest rate they agreed to, the higher the commission lenders were paying to dealers. Many have argued that this creates a clear conflict of interest by encouraging dealers to offer higher interest arrangements.

Let’s take a look at the recent Supreme Court decision on this issue and the impact it could have on buyers.

By Nancy Nan

Background

The dispute involves a tripartite relationship between customer, dealer, and lender. There are three cases focusing on this dispute: Johnson v FirstRand Bank Limited (London Branch) t/a MotoNovo Finance, Wrench v FirstRand Bank Limited (London Branch) t/a MotoNovo Finance and Hopcraft and another v Close Brothers Limited.

All three cases are intricately linked to each other, with Johnson the leading case amongst them. The respondents are the customers who bought the car with credit supplied by the lenders, the appellants.

The customers received different decisions at first instance and first appeal but eventually were all successful in the Court of Appeal. The lenders reacted to this by choosing to appeal. The legal issues discussed below will focus on the lenders’ appeals to the Supreme Court.

Legal Issues

While there are other issues, the main legal issue focuses on whether a car dealer, who receives a commission from a lender, owes a duty to the buyer of the car that entitles the buyer to bring a claim against the lender, either for bribery or dishonest assistance under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (the “CCA”).

The CCA demands that both the customer and the lender have a duty to maintain a fair relationship. A further question would be, to what extent the information of a commission is undisclosed for the fairness of the relationship to be affected? This is a straightforward question to answer – the court will apply the CCA standards.

Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the lenders’ appeals. There is a distinct tort of bribery and the respondents suggested that the car dealers owe a fiduciary duty to them which enables them to bring the claim of bribery against the lenders. The Court held that no fiduciary duty is owed by the dealers to customers. The court believes it is reasonable for any party to consider their own interests in the first place, and receiving a commission falls under the scope of the dealers’ commercial objectives. Hence, with the absence of fiduciary obligations, the customers’ claim of bribery towards the lenders was unsuccessful.

On the other hand, Mr Johnson’s claim under the CCA was affirmed. The secret 25% commission from the lenders to dealers was considered significantly affected by the fairness of the relationship between Mr Johnson and FirstRand, under section 140A of the CCA. The reason only Mr Johnson’s claim under the CCA was successful, was because of the unfair relationship between Johnson and the lender. The size of the commission paid by the lender to the dealer was excessive and disproportionate to the price of the car.

In addition, the dealer supplied a misleading Suitability Document, concealing the relationship between the dealer and the lender, misrepresenting the dealer’s independence. It is in breach of disclosure rules under the Financial Conduct Authority (the “FCA”), which further affected the fairness of the customer-lender relationship. As a result, a compensation was ordered under section 140B of the CCA, that Mr Johnson would receive a payment equivalent to the commission of £1,650.95 with interest.

Our Thoughts

The banks may be relieved by the Supreme Court decision. However, the decision does not completely let the lenders off the hook for paying compensation to consumers if the interest rates are unfairly charged or the excessive charges are imposed on consumers.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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.