Another airfield under threat

[egbgstudent]

Heard a roumour that Leicester (EGBG) is facing a real and genuine threat of closure.
It appears that as the land is owned by the local CO-OP, they are planning on evicting Leicestershire Aero Club, and selling the land for residential development.
This will lead to the closure of one of the best airfields in the country.
The more airfields we lose in the country, severely restricts available landing opyions in the event of an emergency. :ugh:

Has anyone else heard this roumour?

Can anyone shed any light onto this?

[Rod1]

I am a member at Leicester and I think this is very unlikely. The club extended its lease quite recently.

Rod1

[egbgstudent]

That is what I thought as well. As I have been associated with Leicester for over 20 years. However I have been informed that the CO-OP are wanting to ignore our recent lease, and go ahead with the sale. I can only hope that with the recent halt in the property market, that this will now be shelved.

Let us all hope that those rumours are untrue

[tmmorris]

They might of course sell with a sitting tenant to an investment company with a view to that company selling it off in the future - quick buck now for Co-op, big but slow bucks in the future for the investment company.

It stinks, of course, but it happens.

Tim

[Justiciar]

the CO-OP are wanting to ignore our recent lease


Lawyer's hat on: a landlord cannot "ignore" a lease. They can sell subject to it; they can try and oppose the right which the club would have to renew a lease by arguing that they want to redevelop the site, but ignore it they can't.

[Sir George Cayley]

As ever, the Devil will be in the detail:suspect:

Does the phrase "Break Clause" ring any bells? Best check the small print in the lease. If the saavy CO-OP lawyers drafted the new lease with a view to future development potential. They may have inserted a break clause in the lease that determines it on grant of, lets say for argument, outline planning permission for residential housing.:ugh:

Also worth considering what the value of the Leicester Aero Club is and then weigh that against the proceed of the sale of the land. Subtract the value of the aircraft as they can move. As a business including goodwill it might not be as much a you might expect.

One immediate action to thwart plans could be to get anything old on the aerodrome "listed" as Barton and Shoreham did. That does not extend to old codgers sat in the clubhouse on a Tuesday lunchtime though.

Best of luck. It is a site worth fighting to save.

Sir George Cayley

[S-Works]

Not sure where this latest rumour came from but nobody else seems to know about it. The club did recently extend the lease and again nothing was mentioned. I do recall the housing thing being brought up last year but the council denied planning permission

Also Leicester Aero Club is not a business it is a cub owned by us the members with a council of management elected by the members. It is not a flying school masquerading as a flying club.

[Sir George Cayley]

Same as the LAC at Barton then. And look what happened there.

But if the opp was turned down then p'raps the CO-OP won't get a divvy this time.

Sir George Cayley

[sternone]

Lawyer's hat on: a landlord cannot "ignore" a lease. They can sell subject to it; they can try and oppose the right which the club would have to renew a lease by arguing that they want to redevelop the site, but ignore it they can't

Maybe a 'good' laywer's hat on: Every new owner that takes over a land with current lease can kick out the club who has the lease and or give them a term to move out, or pay an amount. The amount to be payed to a local club is absolutely peanuts to what a big development land mostly at a good residential location is worth when it's developped. The club owners will say it's a shame, but most of it will grab the money and thank god that they finally made some bucks instead of loosing them.

Please note that i'm totally against project development on airplane fields!! i hate it!!! go live somewere else!!

[Justiciar]

Every new owner that takes over a land with current lease can kick out the club who has the lease and or give them a term to move out, or pay an amount.


Absolute c*ap. How long have you practiced Landlord and tenant law, sternone?:ugh:

Anyone who buys property takes it subject to any existing lease.

Most "clubs" will have sufficient commercial aspects to them to qualify as businesses under the 1954 Act. That Act gives a business tenant the right to renew a tenancy and provides a limited number of grounds on which a Landlord can refuse a new lease or gain possession of the land. The Act requires a minimum of six months' notice to be given to the tenant.

Although redevelopment is a ground for refusing a new lease, the landlord has to go alot further than simply trot out the word. He has to show definite well advanced plans, including usually the grant of planning permission.


Does the phrase "Break Clause" ring any bells?


Yes, but to exercise a break clause a Landlord still has to comply with the Act and rely on the same grounds. Most break clauses are triggered after a number of years into a tenancy rather than by an event like planning permission. For a tenant, such a clause would mean a lease would have little attraction for them. Plus, it would be impossible for the landlord to insist on a break clause in a renewal unless there was one already in the existing lease which was to be renewed.

The only exception here is if the provisions of the Act have been excluded by agreement before the lease commenced.

[sternone]

The Act requires a minimum of six months' notice to be given to the tenant.

Well you answered it yourself in the above sentence, who cares about 6 month notice compared to the price gain ?

About your remark " How long have you practiced Landlord and tenant law," my answer is simply this: have you already realised you have choosen one of the worse jobs you can have in a life ? no ? well, you will sooner or later. I must admid that indeed about this case, UK could be different than my country, my country's law is based on the ius commune with Justinianus, yours didn't used the code napoleon and is based on the jurisprudence...

[Justiciar]

Sternone:

You seem to be building something of a reputation for spouting off on subjects you appear to know little about.

Under English law, not only is a minimum of six months notice required but the landlord can only get possession on a limited number of grounds, which are set out in the Act. When you serve the notice you have to specify the ground for possession and you cannot then go back and add in other grounds later. Hence a club like Leicester, assuming its lease is not excluded from the Act, has a good deal of protection and at the end of the lease it is entitled to ask the court to grant a new lease, even if the landlord opposes it.

Yes, the English system is based on the common law, which is presumably what you were grasping for when you tailed off. However, the rules governing business tenancies are statutory and owe nothing to the common law.


have you already realised you have choosen one of the worse jobs you can have in a life ?

As understand it, personal attacks are another of your personality traits:yuk:

As it happens, after 25 years in the job I haven't yet realised it is the worst job in the world. It actually pays for alot of flying in some nice aeroplanes.:E

[sternone]

You seem to be building something of a reputation for spouting off on subjects you appear to know little about. As understand it, personal attacks are another of your personality traits


Oh, that was just a reaction about your quote to me, you are stating that i don't know anything about law according to your measurments:

Absolute c*ap. How long have you practiced Landlord and tenant law, sternone?

As i tried to say before in the post, i said that in my law it's not needed to give an extra reason, but since there is a different in euro law and uk law i can understand that you are correct. i did not attack you personally, you attacked me personally, and while i'm on it, if you call your nice aeroplanes G-IPKA for sale at £49,000, PA-28 and others, no problem, they are nice planes, but you have to admid that if you visit some descent fair there are bloody nicer planes that you can't to seem to afford with your dream job

[Justiciar]

Sternone:

Now you really are getting personal. Some of us know the true identities of many on this forum, but we should not publish personal information about PPRuNers without their consent, so as to draw attention to their identities. You know nothing about me other than what you have evidently trawled from the internet, so don't presume.

[sternone]

Yes, i agree with you, but it is information you have posted yourself, and there is nothing wrong with that information, isn't it ?

Anyways, i don't wan't to get into any war again, so you are right, i am wrong, you are smart, i am dum, you are rich, i am poor, you are good looking, i am ugly, you have nice wifes, mine's are old and ugly, you have nicer cars, i drive old crap, your planes fly faster, mines are slower, you win, i lose.

Cheers.

[S-Works]

Wow thats a spat worthy of me........ :p

[Solar]

Words out of my mouth BoseX

[Dysonsphere]

Hmmm handbags at 10 paces I feel:p

[stickandrudderman]

It's a shame that it's all ended so amicably, I was just beginning to enjoy it!

[Justiciar]

We can go again if you really want us to :E

[sternone]

We can go again if you really want us to

Despite my previous post, i'm ready! (and i don't need others to make up my own mind...)

[davidatter708]

I have heard the same it was in the leicester mercury about a month ago but then again for about 10 years they have been saying it will be closed and put to housing and it hasnt yet so until someone kicks me of I will continue to fly form EGBG
David

[FlyboyUK]

This sounds like the huge Stretton Magna development the co-op proposed in the late 80s when I was learning to fly at Leicester. Hopefully it will get thrown out again, especially as there already seems to be a large amount of local opposition to the development.

Leicester is superb GA airfield with a great club of which I have many fond memories that put me on the path to a flying career. If the development goes ahead, I for one will be very sad to see it go.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/politics_show/regions/east_midlands/7093212.stm
http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=132384&command=displayContent&sourceNode=252123&contentPK=19115013&folderPk=115966&pNodeId=252186

[konfused]

There is a petition that opposes the proposed development that encompasses Leicester Airfield, the address is www. save-england .com

[llanfairpg]

Sounds like a good idea

[Sleeve Wing]

Just caught this thread and the immediate thought was.." here we go again "
What have we got here ?
An old war-time airfield still used for that "irritating" hobby, flying noisy 'planes, all flown of course by rich Tory supporters.
A local Labour-dominated council.
A "Brown field" site that doesn't take much effort to throw a planning application at.
Etc Etc Etc .........
What happened to "Green belt" ?
What happened to the "live and let live" ethos that used to be ?
Green Belt ?
Old hat, ditch it ! We have lots and lots of lovely new people/visitors (!) to house.
Live and let live ?
Modern peeps seem to think that they can change anything if they disagree with it. Move into a house, find an aerodrome next door that's been there since 1935 (or 1943 in this case) Hey, don't like that. Shut it down !
Any excuse to get rid of the "problem" without thought for the rights of any long-established locals and residents. Just "I want" so I get !!
I've known Stoughton/Leicester East/Leicester Airport, well, for over fifly years now. I started to fly there when I was fourteen years old. I visited with my Dad when there were still a few Stirlings and a lot of Daks there. I retired as a long serving airline captain and ex military pilot.
Its a great airfield, well run, a marvellous amenity to the City and surrounding area.
Please don't give in to the miserable bu**ers who don't even belong to our county.
Please develop the facility as an airfield not another ill-conceived mass of concrete.

It's in a perfect position :ok:

[colinwwood]

I have been flying at Leicester for some 10 years and have heard similar ideas aired before. Many members consider that the Coop see the airfield as a "cash cow" and a suitable asset to be sold. However, the item published in the "Leicester Mercury" indicated that an Eco-Town of some 20,000 inhabitants would be located in the area of Staughton, Great Glen and Houghton on the Hill. This town would provide employment for many of the people, there would be new road and rail links. Sounds like a town planner's fantasy. Perhaps the editor of the "Mercury" could provide hard evidence for the article.

The prospect of yet another airfield being destroyed is, to my mind, another indication that governments simply do not understand the need for technology, in all its forms. :hmm:

[FlyboyUK]

There is a petition that opposes the proposed development that encompasses Leicester Airfield, the address is www. save-england .com

http://www.save-england.net/stoughton-ecotown/index.asp


http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/PennburyEcoTown/

[FlyboyUK]

Apparently the initial decision by the goverment on which sites are going to be narrowed down to the final few eco-towns will be in the next few weeks. Time is of the essence.

Spread the news and sign the petition

[formationfoto]

What a shame I only came into this post after the spat between the sensible Justiciar and the foolish Sternone had drawn to an impasse. For once I was ready to get off my modest, middle ground and leap in with both feet to offer my own understanding of tenancy as someone who has been involved in commercial property from a mergers and aqcuisitions perspective.

Even with my peripheral, and highly limited, knowledge it is clear that if a lease exists in favour of the club at Leicester and the club satisfies the terms of the lease any new landlord is not in a position to remove the lease. The tenant can not be disadvantaged by the change in ownership.

Money can talk but for that to have any effect someone has to listen, In other words the club has to be prepared to take a buy out of the lease. If it isnt then they stay put until the end of the lease and then the position depends on whether the lease was drawn up with the intention of circumventing the protection of the Landlord and Tenant Act.

Landlords can seek to identify breaches. They can make life difficult. But they can not remove a tenant legally occupying the property and satisfying the terms of the lease. At least not in the U.K and that, when I last looked, is where Liecester is situate.

Uninformed comment is fine but at least when someone who is clearly better informed speaks dont try to continue the argument. Accept that you are wrong and move on. Life is difficult enough for those of us wishing to exercise the passion which is general aviation without us waving our malformed willies around! Out.

[xrayalpha]

Hey,

Know what the Co-op is, it is a business owned and run by its members!

Not really what most other landlords are.

So pay your quid and get the same voting and speaking rights as anyone else.

If there are more eco-resident members than GA members, well don't be surprised who might win a vote.

But if more GA members can be bothered to turn out......

That's the flaw in democracy!