Share this page!

Nearly Legal Profile picture
Twitter logo
15 Mar, 4 tweets, 2 min read
Waiting for the House of Lords to vote on amendment 87C to the #DABill - to make it easier for a perpetrator to be removed from a joint tenancy without ending the tenancy. But earlier, saw the minister promise consultation and possible regulation in response to amend 66B. Image
The amend was to prevent a council from taking into account local connection for a victim of domestic abuse fleeing from council accommodation in another area in the council’s allocation eligibility decisions. bills.parliament.uk/Publications/4…
Pleasingly, I recognised the amend as one that was drafted by @justinbates28 and myself for the Commons stage of the #DABill and resurrected by the remarkable efforts of @womensaid and others. I didn’t know it was coming back.
A govt commitment to the principle, and to consultation and probable regulations is a good result. Pleased about that. Not quite the same as the amend being passed, but a definite result. Now fingers crossed for 87C…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Nearly Legal

Nearly Legal Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @nearlylegal

Nearly Legal Profile picture
17 Mar
On the Lords passing the McPartland/Smith/Bishop of St Albans amendment to the Fire Safety Bill. 1) Hurrah! 2) What happens now? The Bill goes back to the commons. But this time, unlike the govt stitch up last time, there will have to be a vote on the amendment. >
3) What does the amendment do? It is a short, neat, and quite brutal amend which would simply stop the costs of works under an order or notice under the 2005 fire safety order (amended by the Fire Safety Bill) from being passed on to leaseholders if in respect of build defects >
4) Does it dump all the costs on freeholders, as the minister suggested today? No, it is silent on who pays, except not the leaseholders. Could that mean freeholders have to pay? Yes, without something further from the Govt. Could freeholders go bust? Yes, just as leaseholders >
Read 5 tweets
Nearly Legal Profile picture
31 Jan
A couple of meta comments on the weekend’s legal related issues. 1) If I said something here in my private capacity which profoundly went against my firm’s stated values, I would expect there to be serious consequences for me. This is not about freedom of speech.
2) As a solicitor, I can choose what cases and clients I take on. Barristers can’t - if I instruct a barrister, they must do their best for the client whether or not they agree with the client’s position or like the client. This is very important. >
It means everyone can get a barrister who will argue their case as strongly as it can be argued within the law. I’ve instructed barristers who have previously argued against the legal argument I want to put forward now. I do this because they are good at their job, not because>
Read 9 tweets
Nearly Legal Profile picture
29 Jan
Some thoughts ahead of the debate on building safety and the costs of remediation that Labour intend to force on Monday, and on the cladding/fire safety fiasco in general. This may be a lengthy thread (oh hell it is)… 1/23
It surely cannot be questioned that the absolute priority is that these buildings are fixed. Maybe hundreds of thousands of leaseholders (or their tenants) are living in unsafe, unmortgageable, unsellable properties. It is destroying lives and the property market.. 2/23
et alone the risk of another disaster and loss of life. So, the question is, has to be, how best to achieve the fixing of these buildings. As things currently stand, outside of the limits of the £1.6 billion in ACM and Non ACM remediation grants provided by the Govt, … 3/23
Read 24 tweets
Nearly Legal Profile picture
20 Oct 20
Watched the @CommonsHCLG evidence of @team_greenhalgh Some thoughts on the minister’s position on the draft Building Safety Bill, with a particular view on the position of leaseholders.
First, they are continuing to explore ‘buildings with multiple owners’ - I’m not surprised as multiple accountable persons would be a nightmare. Second ‘we need to hear the voice of residents’ - well yes, but apparently have not done so so far, which is, you know, a bit late.
Thirdly, ‘could learn from Australia’ - no signs of having done so at all… Fourthly ‘looking at these costs, trying to unblock the finances, and make sure costs to leaseholders affordable, but nothing to report now’ says Expert Adviser Michael Wade (insurer background) -
Read 11 tweets
Nearly Legal Profile picture
20 Sep 20
Via @Lees_Martina (and @PeteApps ) we now have a sense of how bad the cladding crisis is. The Govt’s (non-ACM) fund for remedial works had 2,957 blocks registered. (The fund would cover about 600 blocks.) That is a quarter of all high rise blocks in England.
Add to that the 300 or so blocks with ACM cladding remaining. These 3257 are the blocks with identified issues, and that met the initial requirements of the Govt’s scheme. There will be more where issues not yet identified.
There will be many more blocks under 18m height with issues as well. Of blocks that have had an EWS1 inspection so far, 92% have failed. Even though it is likely that blocks with known issues, or likely issues, would be inspected first, that is a staggering percentage.
Read 9 tweets
Nearly Legal Profile picture
17 Sep 20
Possession claims, there is more - defendants in cases started before 3 August 2020 will apparently be getting this letter assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl…
Claimants will be getting this letter assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl… and presumably this information pack assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl… (helpfully starting ‘Avoid Court’).
This is the information that is sent to tenant defendants, it appears. assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl…
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @nearlylegal has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @nearlylegal!

Read all threads by @nearlylegal