Enforcing a Judgment

In tip sheet 7, we explained the benefits of pre-issue checks on debtors before commencing proceedings in the County Court. This avoids spending money to obtain Judgment and then finding that your debtor is a “man of straw” and has no assets against which you can enforce your Judgment.
This fact sheet explains some of the popular methods used to enforce a Judgment and some of the advantages / disadvantages of each, so that you can decide which method of enforcement is the best method to obtain your money.
Execution against goods
Execution against goods is a popular method for enforcing a judgment. If a Judgment is over £600, we recommend that the Judgment be transferred to the High Court and executed by High Court Enforcement Officers. An Enforcement Officer will make a visit to the debtor’s premises with a view to seizing goods to the value of the judgment. The officer will try to persuade the debtor to make payment. There is always a risk that a) the debtor does not have any goods to seize; b) that the debtor has left the premises or c) the debtor refuses to let the enforcement officer in (if it is a residential property, a debtor can refuse entry).
There is an abortive fee if the Enforcement Officers are unsuccessful and therefore, it is worthwhile satisfying yourself that a debtor is likely to have goods of value that can be seized (e.g. vehicles / equipment / machinery) before instructing enforcement officers. If the enforcement officers are successful in seizing goods to the value of the Judgment, they will try to recover their costs from the debtor.
Charging Orders
A charging order is a way of securing a Judgment against a debtor’s beneficial interest in land (e.g. house / commercial property), securities or certain other assets. Where there is sufficient equity in a debtor’s property, the benefit of the charging order is that the debtor will need to settle the debt before selling the land. You should satisfy yourself that there is sufficient equity in the property to pay you after the secured creditors (e.g bank) have been paid first. This is not always easy to do but we can discuss this with you should you be in any doubt regarding the debtor’s position.
Attachment of Earnings
An attachment of earnings order attaches itself to a debtor’s income from employment and allows a proportion of the debtor’s earnings (deducted by his employer) to be paid to a judgment creditor in instalments until the judgment debt is satisfied. Attachment of Earnings Orders are a popular method of enforcement as they are an inexpensive and relatively straightforward method of collecting the debt.
Debtor’s are often concerned about the possibility of their employer knowing about debts owed by the debtor and therefore, this can often be a powerful method of enforcement where a debtor is employed.
Insolvency Proceedings: Bankruptcy and Company Liquidation
If you are owed more than £750 by an individual debtor you can apply to make him / her bankrupt. If your debtor is a company, you can apply to wind up the Company.
After an order is made the assets are collected by a trustee or liquidator and distributed amongst all the creditors. There is no guarantee that this process will result in payment of your debtor however, the threat of insolvency is often encourage a debtor to make payment. As an alternative to applying for the bankruptcy or liquidation, it is worth considering serving a Statutory Demand for Winding Up or Bankruptcy. This is a formal request for payment within 21 days. In the event that payment is not made within 21 days, the debtor is deemed unable to pay their debts and you can thereafter apply to the Court for bankruptcy or winding up. Service of a Statutory Demand can be a very effective way of prompting payment and is a lower cost alternative to a formal petition.
If the debtor is unable to pay the debt, you can petition for bankruptcy or liquidation. You will need to satisfy yourself however that this is likely to result in payment of the debt or that you are happy to proceed with this process even though payment of your debt may not follow.
We are always happy to discuss the best method of enforcement for your particular matter and would encourage you to consider enforcement methods, before issuing proceedings, in order to ensure that you only spend money on Court proceedings where it looks as though enforcement is likely to result in payment to you.
If you would like further information regarding our debt recovery service, please contact our Rita Wright at rita.wright@breezeandwyles.co.uk or 01992 558411.

Landlords: what to do (or not to do) if your tenant abandons the premises?

In the current economic climate, an increasing number of landlords are faced with tenants who vacate premises and stop paying rent with little or no warning.
How a landlord should react in this situation depends on what they hope to achieve. From the moment a landlord realises that the premises have been abandoned, their actions can have important and potentially costly consequences for that landlord. Before deciding how to react, the landlord should consider whether it is worth ‘keeping the tenant on the hook’ for ongoing rent and other liabilities under the lease. This may depend on whether the tenant is solvent. There may well not be much point in the cost and time involved in pursuing an insolvent tenant for outstanding and ongoing liabilities.
If the tenant is solvent and worth pursuing for breach of contract or for rent arrears and future rent payments, then the landlord will wish to avoid behaving in a way which could (together with the tenant’s actions) be taken to be a surrender of the lease ‘by operation of law’, thus letting the tenant off the hook for ongoing liability. The landlord may wish to ensure they behave in a way consistent with the continuance of the lease and thus preserve the right to pursue the tenant for rent payments until another suitable tenant is found.
Consequences of surrender of a lease by operation of law
The consequences of a surrender by operation of law include the following:
1. The tenant is released from its obligation to pay future rent.
2. Many leases provide for the payment of a service charge estimate by the tenant, to be followed by a ‘balancing’ payment at the end of each service charge year should the actual service charge due be higher. The landlord will not be able to recover a balancing payment that falls due after the date of surrender, unless the lease provides otherwise.
3. The parties do however remain liable for any breach of covenant and arrears prior to the surrender date.
How a surrender by operation of law comes about
A surrender by operation of law will take place only if the tenant and the landlord both behave in a way towards each other that is clearly and unequivocally inconsistent with the continuation of a lease. A surrender by operation of law cannot be one sided. The tenant must be seen to have surrendered the lease, and the landlord to have accepted the surrender. After such behaviour either party would be ‘estopped’ from then arguing that the lease continues.
By abandoning premises, taking their fixtures and fittings and handing or posting the keys back to the landlord, the tenant could, depending on the overall circumstances, be deemed to have behaved in a way that is inconsistent with the continuance of their lease. This is especially so if, for example, the tenant writes to the landlord confirming that it can no longer pay rent and no longer wishes to remain at the premises. However, this is not enough by itself to result in a surrender by operation of law.
It is what the landlord does in response to this that is critical.
It is the parties’ behaviour that is important, not their intent. A surrender by operation of law can occur irrespective of, or even despite, the intention of the parties. So landlords must be especially careful not to inadvertently accept a surrender where they have no intention of doing so.
Does it matter?
The landlord should consider at the outset what it wants to achieve, and what it is realistic to expect to achieve.
The landlord may want the tenant’s liability to continue, and so he can sue the tenant for future rents. This is more likely where the lettings market is weak and the prospect of finding a new tenant quickly and at the same rent is poor. This can matter more where the tenant vacates early in the lease term.
The landlord may have committed to carrying out extensive maintenance and repair works to the building or estate containing the premises. Therefore, it will want to be able to recover the balance of the service charge due from the tenant for the remaining part of the service charge year.
However, the most practical point to consider is whether the tenant is worth pursuing for any arrears in rent, service charge and any other monies due under the lease. They may have become insolvent, or have applied to the court for an administration order which would automatically restrict the landlord’s ability to bring a claim. Or a corporate tenant may simply have been dissolved. In these cases the landlord may decide that the loss of entitlement to make a claim is irrelevant, and that it is preferable to accept the surrender, regain possession of the property and deal with it freely.
If, on the other hand, the landlord does wish to preserve its claim against the tenant for future rents and liability for other obligations under the lease, it should take care not to act in a way which would constitute acceptance of a surrender.
How easy is it to prove surrender by operation of law?
Case law has confirmed that the threshold for confirming that the landlord has accepted a surrender by operation of law is high. In other words, the fact that his behaviour in this respect must be unequivocable means that usually it is not easy for a party to prove a surrender has been accepted.
This has been highlighted in a case heard by the Court of Appeal case in June this year. The landlords let a builders yard to a company (Co 1) that became insolvent and ceased operating from the yard. Another company (Co 2) took occupation, started paying rent and began negotiating a new lease with the landlord. Negotiations broke down and the administrative receivers for Co 1 agreed to assign their lease to Co 2. The landlord argued that Co 1’s lease had been surrendered by operation of law, Co 2 occupied under a tenancy at will and that the tenancy at will was now terminated. The Court of Appeal ruled that Co 1’s conduct was not “unequivocally inconsistent with the continuance of the lease” and that there was no surrender by operation of law. This was despite Co 1 making it clear that they wanted nothing more to do with the lease, ceasing to pay rent and knowing a third party was negotiating a new lease, and despite the landlord acknowledging this by negotiating a new lease with Co 2.
Even though this and other cases have shown that the test for surrender by operation of law is a difficult one to prove, landlords still need to be careful. They would do well to have in mind the distinction between actions which are likely to constitute acceptance of surrender and those which are not. Examples of behaviour which could apply in either case are set out below.
Actions which are likely to amount to an acceptance of a surrender
• Taking possession of the premises. A landlord can do this by moving into the property and occupying it for the landlord’s own purposes.
• Redecorating the property to its own taste and allowing family members or friends to occupy the premises for their own purposes.
• Moving items into the property for storage.
• Re-letting to someone else with the tenant’s consent.
Actions which when TAKEN ALONE in each case are unlikely to amount to an acceptance of a surrender
• Receiving the keys back without demanding them, for example, where delivered in the post or by hand through a letter box.
• Entering the premises to inspect and repair. This is consistent with the rights the landlord would already have during the lease term.
• Carrying out repairs and taking security measures to protect the property against intruders and to preserve the value of the landlord’s interest.
• Failing to demand rent and service charge when the landlord knew the tenant no longer wants the lease. Mere inaction alone is usually not enough to constitute unequivocal acceptance of a surrender.
• Case law suggests that the landlord could reasonably be entitled to mitigate his losses by , in addition to any of the above actions, preparing to relet the property without this necessarily amounting to an acceptance of a surrender. However, it is not clear to what extent remarketing and finding a new tenant would jeopardise the landlord’s claim against the tenant. A court would consider each case on its facts, and advice should be sought before reletting as to whether this may affect the landlord’s claim for future rents.
A court will consider all of the landlord’s actions taken together in deciding whether the landlord has accepted the surrender. The landlord should therefore try to do only what is necessary to secure, repair and protect the property and then, subject to seeking appropriate advice, to try to find a new tenant if needs be. The key thing is not to be seen to be taking back possession of the property.
An example of this risk is illustrated by a 2009 case where the Court of Appeal confirmed a surrender by operation of law had occurred when after a tenant had abandoned premises, the landlord took back the keys, redecorated and occupied the property for six weeks.
Merely writing to the tenant asserting that the lease continues and that rent remains due, is not enough to prevent a surrender by operation of law, especially if accompanied by an action which is likely to constitute an unequivocal acceptance of surrender.
One point that does not appear in its own right to have been clearly settled in case law, but which is in our view could matter, is the timing of a landlord’s claim in tandem with other action it takes. If the landlord makes a claim against the errant tenant for future rent and service charge or other breach, whilst or before taking steps to protect the property, it may be easier for him to argue that he has not accepted a surrender than if he waits until after taking those steps. However, this is not guaranteed, and any case argued in court will be taken on its own facts.
Hannah Collins

Solicitor

Commercial Property

Commercial Property Testimonial

Commercial Property Testimonial

Great Service. Hannah is a credit to your company.

Very impressed. I have already recommended my father who is using your services and I am about to appoint Hannah Collins on a property development deal.

Hannah is always efficient and communicates well.


Access to the UK Business Market

With a Corporate Department in Hertford (20 miles north of London) Breeze & Wyles Solicitors LLP is well placed to support any business looking to create a market share in the UK as a springboard to the larger prize of the European Business market.
However there are a number of things that you should consider before taking that leap. In the first of a number of blogs on this issue I discuss two of those items below.
Build Relationships with local business support networks
Entering a new market is like starting a new business. Before commencing operations any business owner will look to do a through investigation of the local market. Information such as employee rights, commercial property law, licensing and regulatory rules and corporate governance are key to your success. The starting point may be UK Trade and Investment or the British Chamber of Commerce as the source of this information. Breeze & Wyles Solicitors LLP is a Patron Member of Hertfordshire Chamber of Commerce and can draw on all of the relevant information necessary for any client looking to enter this market and provide introductions to professionals in any area that a new market entrant may require.
Globalisation does not mean harmonisation. Each country will have different laws in relation to types of business operations. You should understand these anomalies before you consider entering that market.
Get a personal view of the market
Come and see the location for yourself. Many business owners work on gut instinct. Come and meet our team and other professionals whose advice may be necessary to your deliberations and review the way that your operation is likely to work in the UK as this is sure to be different from the way the remainder of your business works.
As the UKTI says:
“Why the UK?
Rich and diverse market
The UK is a rich and diverse market ranging from Pharmaceuticals, Fashion and Advanced Manufacturing through to primary food production and including world leading businesses in Space Technologies Aerospace and Automotive engineering. Whatever market sector you operate in you will find the UK an attractive location with customers, product innovators, suppliers and partners easily accessible.
Creative and innovative
Every business needs good ideas and the UK is one of the most prolific sources of imaginative solutions and creative thinking in the world. From research in academia through companies innovating in new products to design for the high street and digital creativity for the games industry, the UK has an outstanding record of achievement.
UK labour market
The UK’s labour market is one of the worlds’ most flexible. This factor combined with its strong skills base in the UK is reflected in its excellent record of attracting major foreign investors from all over the world.”
If you have an interest in entering the UK Business Market contact Brendan O’Brien on brendan.obrien@breezeandwyles.co.uk or on 00 44 1992 558411


Happy New Year and a Prosperous 2013 from Breeze & Wyles Solicitors LLP

I write on behalf of Breeze & Wyles Solicitors LLP to thank you for your continued custom in 2012 and to wish you the very best in the year to come.
The firm offers the following services and details can be found the following URL links:
Conveyancing                                    
http://www.breezeandwyles.co.uk/movinghome/index.html
Family, Matrimonial and Child Care   
http://www.breezeandwyles.co.uk/Family/index.html
Wills and Probate                             
http://www.breezeandwyles.co.uk/willsprobate/index.html
Company Commercial                      
http://www.breezeandwyles.co.uk/commercial/index.html
Employment                                      
http://www.breezeandwyles.co.uk/employment/index.html
Commercial Litigation                       
http://www.breezeandwyles.co.uk/litigation/index.html
Commercial Property                       
http://www.breezeandwyles.co.uk/commercial/index.html
Debt Recovery                                  
http://www.breezeandwyles.co.uk/DebtRecovery/index.html
Corporate Insolvency                       
http://www.breezeandwyles.co.uk/commercial/insolvency.html
HR Together (Employment Advice Line and Insurance)
Volume Legal Services                     
http://breezeplus.co.uk/
If you have any legal need please feel free to contact me on brendan.obrien@breezeandwyles.co.uk and I will pass your details to one of my colleagues who will be able to discuss your matter on a confidential basis.

Tyre fire courts controversy on who pays the bill

Commercial property owners and tenants reminded to keep up with insurance obligations following the ruling of The Court of Appeal in the case of Wyvern Tyres, where a fire spread next door, with judges saying the company is not liable for damage to adjoining premises
Commercial property owners and tenants are being urged to check their insurance obligations following a Court of Appeal ruling which refused a compensation pay out when fire had spread to neighbouring premises.
Last month the Court of Appeal ruled in the case of Stannard (t/a Wyvern Tyres) v Gore that a tyre-supply company was not liable to the owner of the adjoining premises when a fire broke out and destroyed both units.
The tyre supply company stored about 3,000 tyres on its premises and when an electrical fault started a fire, the tyres were soon blazing and it was impossible to put the fire out, soon spreading to the adjacent unit.
It is a basic legal principle that a person cannot be liable for damage caused to another unless they intended to cause the damage or have been negligent. In this case there was no suggestion of negligence on the part of the tyre company, but when the case was first heard in the county court, the tyre company was found liable under a long-standing rule known as Rylands v Fletcher.
This was a 19th century case in which a reservoir that had been constructed for Rylands burst through some old shafts and flooded a coal mine owned by Fletcher. There was no negligence on the part of Mr Rylands but the House of Lords held that a person could be liable without any fault on their part if he brings an exceptionally dangerous thing onto his property, the use of the property is unusual, and the dangerous thing escapes and damages other property.
When Wyvern Tyres challenged the first decision, the case ended up in the Court of Appeal where the County Court ruling was overturned. The judges said that the conditions for liability under Rylands v Fletcher were not fulfilled: no one would describe tyres as exceptionally dangerous, and the thing that escaped and caused damage to the neighbour was the fire, not the tyres, and the fire had not been brought onto Mr Stannard’s land.
According to Brendan O'Brien, commercial expert with Hertfordshire based firm Breeze & Wyles Solicitors LLP, the ruling in this latest case comes as no surprise.
He explained: “The rule in Rylands v Fletcher has always been controversial. Legal academics criticise it because the idea of liability without fault is anathema. And back in the 19th century it was heavily criticised as putting a brake on enterprise and wealth creation.
“We are more used to risk-assessment obligations nowadays, and the lesson from environmental disasters over the last fifty years is that companies storing dangerous materials, whether it is a slag heap, a chemical factory or a nuclear plant, must accept their responsibilities and pay the price if they get it wrong.
“We are also more litigious and there’s a greater expectation of a result if you take action against someone. But the courts prefer to leave it to Parliament to dictate sanctions through environmental legislation and have resolutely refused to expand the rule in Rylands v Fletcher beyond its narrow limits, so it’s not surprising the Court of Appeal overturned the County Court ruling in this case.”
He added: “What’s important is that commercial owners and tenants realise they’re not going to be able to blame someone else in this sort of situation, and make sure their insurance is robust and meets all their obligations for property, plant and machinery right through to business interruption.”
Rylands v Fletcher 1868 UKHL
Cambridge Water Co Ltd v Eastern Counties Leather plc [1994] 1 All ER 53
Stannard (t/a Wyvern Tyres) v Gore [2012] EWCA Civ 1248
ENDS
Web site content note:
This is not legal advice; it is intended to provide information of general interest about current legal issues.


SME Corner: Warranties and Indemnities – the tax consequences explained

In a Company Sale, a claim for breach of warranty depends on proof of loss and the purchaser must establish that the value of the shares has been diminished by the breach. They are also subject to the normal contractual constraints of foreseeability, remoteness, mitigation etc. Claims under an indemnity are for a specific amount reflecting the discovered shortfall (including depreciation of specific assets), and are not dependent on proof of damage in a general sense. They can be given by the purchaser as well as the sellers.

Example 1

P agrees to indemnify S to cover any costs of meeting redundancy or unfair dismissal claims of employees who are dismissed by P after the change of control of the business.

Example 2

S1 and S2 jointly and severally indemnify P against any environmental claim affecting the commercial property of the company, where pre-contract enquiries have exposed a difficulty but the likelihood of a claim or its quantum is unknown. This is more satisfactory for P than relying on a breach of warranty, although the indemnity will not (without very particular drafting) cover consequential loss of profits if the company is forced to shut down and it will depend on the financial standing of S1 and S2 post-completion.

Tax treatment

The tax treatment of sums recovered under an indemnity is very different from a warranty. Payments made for breach of warranty are regarded as a partial repayment of the purchase price with corresponding recalculations of the sellers' chargeable gain and the purchaser's base cost of the shares acquired. However, indemnity payments are chargeable to corporation tax in the recipient's hands (Zim Properties Ltd v Proctor [1985] STC 90). This has consequences including the following:

(a) the acquisition costs of the asset giving rise to the indemnity payment cannot be used to set off the capital gain;
(b) to neutralise the tax liability, the target would need to gross up the amount of the indemnity claim and this burden would fall on the sellers;
(c) the deed of indemnity could be abandoned and exclusive reliance placed on tax warranties, but to achieve the desired tax effect in the target would need an express provision that its actual liability to tax shall be treated as the purchaser's loss of value on his shareholding (which might otherwise not be the case);
(d) a payment to the purchaser should be pursuant to a covenant and may anyway need to be grossed up (extra-statutory concessions may be available);
(e) the target should be omitted as a party, the sellers covenanting direct with the purchaser to bear the target's loss instead.

If you need more information on this topic or any other on this blog please feel free to request it from me on 01992 558411 or at brendan.obrien@breezeandwyles.co.uk

ENDS

Web site content note:
This is not legal advice; it is intended to provide information of general interest about current legal issues


How can I enter the UK Business Market?

With a Corporate Department in Hertford (20 miles north of London) Breeze & Wyles Solicitors LLP is well placed to support any business looking to create a market share in the UK as a springboard to the larger prize of the European Business market.

However there are a number of things that you should consider before taking that leap. In the first of a number of blogs on this issue I discuss two of those items below.

Build Relationships with local business support networks

Entering a new market is like starting a new business. Before commencing operations any business owner will look to do a through investigation of the local market. Information such as employee rights, commercial property law, licensing and regulatory rules and corporate governance are key to your success. The starting point may be UK Trade and Investment or the British Chamber of Commerce as the source of this information. Breeze & Wyles Solicitors LLP is a Patron Member of Hertfordshire Chamber of Commerce and can draw on all of the relevant information necessary for any client looking to enter this market and provide introductions to professionals in any area that a new market entrant may require.

Globalisation does not mean harmonisation. Each country will have different laws in relation to types of business operations. You should understand these anomalies before you consider entering that market.

Get a personal view of the market

Come and see the location for yourself. Many business owners work on gut instinct. Come and meet our team and other professionals whose advice may be necessary to your deliberations and review the way that your operation is likely to work in the UK as this is sure to be different from the way the remainder of your business works.

As the UKTI says:

“Why the UK?

Rich and diverse market

The UK is a rich and diverse market ranging from Pharmaceuticals, Fashion and Advanced Manufacturing through to primary food production and including world leading businesses in Space Technologies Aerospace and Automotive engineering. Whatever market sector you operate in you will find the UK an attractive location with customers, product innovators, suppliers and partners easily accessible.

Creative and innovative

Every business needs good ideas and the UK is one of the most prolific sources of imaginative solutions and creative thinking in the world. From research in academia through companies innovating in new products to design for the high street and digital creativity for the games industry, the UK has an outstanding record of achievement.

UK labour market

The UK’s labour market is one of the worlds’ most flexible. This factor combined with its strong skills base in the UK is reflected in its excellent record of attracting major foreign investors from all over the world.”

If you have an interest in entering the UK Business Market contact Brendan O’Brien on brendan.obrien@breezeandwyles.co.uk or on 00 44 1992 558411


Why not try Commercial Property Rent Reduction before it makes you insolvent?

Following on from my previous blog entitled ‘Why is Retail suffering more in this recession?’ I referred to rent negotiations in my article. I feel that it is worthwhile examining the complexities of Administrator and Landlord negotiations when a retail business finally collapses.

With the commercial retail lease having been concluded in a very different rental environment unsustainable rents are being demanded and paid when turnover and protiability is under significant pressure. As mentioned in my article property overheads are one of the major costs that contribute to the business’s demise together with funding and staffing costs.

The primary property issues in an administration are twofold and are considered below: -

1. When a retail business enters administration it is subject to a moratorium on legal proceedings. The Landlord’s ability to recover rent arrears is limited and he will now need to fall back on some of the tools that his lawyers created from him at the time of the lease. Enforcement of the right to recover rent arrears using quasi proceedings such as sending in the bailiffs is stymied by the Moratorium. See paragraph 43(6) of Sch B1 Insolvency act 1986. The Landlord may also have no right to any rent deposit deed.

So what rights might exist? Among those rights will include recovery from former tenants, guarantors and subtenants.

a. Former Tenants – in order to take advantage of this option the Landlord must act quickly otherwise the recourse may be lost (see section 17 Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995)
b. Guarantors
c. Sub-Tenants – section 6 of the Law of Property Amendment Act 1908 provides the Landlord the ability to serve notice and miss out the insolvent tenant and recover directly from subtenants up to the amount of the arrears outstanding.

2. What happens next with regard to the property?

The premise upon which an Administrator is appointed will be one of the following with a and b being the most likely reason: -
(a) rescuing the company as a going concern, or
(b) achieving a better result for the company's creditors as a whole than would be likely if the company were wound up (without first being in administration), or
(c) realising property in order to make a distribution to one or more secured or preferential creditors.

It is unlikely that this would be achieved since in the retail environment where the business is dependent on location for its goodwill, the administrator would not be able to achieve the outcomes a and b without the premises as part of an onward sale. This requires the Landlord and the Administrator to negotiate on the relationship and at this point the Landlord may be able to negotiate something in relation to the rent arrears. The rent arrears may be unlikely but it may be that the Landlord can negotiate with the incoming purchaser to ensure that its losses are reduced.

What can be acheived by early discussions?

There is no doubt that the fact of insolvency makes the outcome less certain. So start early.

All of this being said, the current economic environment does not lend itself to Landlords having a laissez faire attitude to empty premises. Before entering Insolvency retail companies are advised to see whether any form of alteration to the terms of the lease can be negotiated. All parties are losers in insolvency and Landlords know this better than most. With their exposure increasing three months after the tenant vacates as a result of empty rates the pressure is on them to find solutions to tenant insolvency.

The only fly in this ointment is that some Landlords do not have the flexibility to re-negotiate as they themselves may be leveraged to the hilt and finding it difficult to fund the interest on the bank loans secured on their properties.

If the content of this article interests you please contact me on 01992 558411 or e mail me at brendan.obrien@breezeandwyles.co.uk


Thinking of entering the UK Business Market?

Having developed a Corporate Department in Hertford (20 miles north of London) Breeze & Wyles Solicitors LLP is well placed to support any business looking to create a market share in the UK as a springboard to the larger prize of the European Business market.

However there are a number of things that you should consider before taking that leap. In the first of a number of blogs on this issue I discuss two of those items below.

Build Relationships with local business support networks

Entering a new market is like starting a new business. Before commencing operations any business owner will look to do a through investigation of the local market. Information such as employee rights, commercial property law, licensing and regulatory rules and corporate governance are key to your success. The starting point may be UK Trade and Investment or the British Chamber of Commerce as the source of this information. Breeze & Wyles Solicitors LLP is a Patron Member of Hertfordshire Chamber of Commerce and can draw on all of the relevant information necessary for any client looking to enter this market and provide introductions to professionals in any area that a new market entrant may require.

Globalisation does not mean harmonisation. Each country will have different laws in relation to types of business operations. You should understand these anomalies before you consider entering that market.

Get a personal view of the market

Come and see the location for yourself. Many business owners work on gut instinct. Come and meet our team and other professionals whose advice may be necessary to your deliberations and review the way that your operation is likely to work in the UK as this is sure to be different from the way the remainder of your business works.

As the UKTI says:

Why the UK?

Rich and diverse market

The UK is a rich and diverse market ranging from Pharmaceuticals, Fashion and Advanced Manufacturing through to primary food production and including world leading businesses in Space Technologies Aerospace and Automotive engineering. Whatever market sector you operate in you will find the UK an attractive location with customers, product innovators, suppliers and partners easily accessible.

Creative and innovative

Every business needs good ideas and the UK is one of the most prolific sources of imaginative solutions and creative thinking in the world. From research in academia through companies innovating in new products to design for the high street and digital creativity for the games industry, the UK has an outstanding record of achievement.

UK labour market

The UK’s labour market is one of the worlds’ most flexible. This factor combined with its strong skills base in the UK is reflected in its excellent record of attracting major foreign investors from all over the world.”

If you have an interest in entering the UK Business Market contact Brendan O’Brien on brendan.obrien@breezeandwyles.co.uk or on 00 44 1992 558411