Park Lane Stables

[Hexx]

After raising a huge amount of money to be able to stay where they are, the Landlords have raised the price of the property to a non-negotiable £1.3m - the exact sum of money raised. See link below.

There are some greedy people out there!



Park Lane Stables Announcement — Park Lane Stables

 

[Quigleyandme]

What a shame. PLS appear to be very fiscally and morally responsible in how they have negotiated with the landlords, raised the funds for the unsuccessful bid and in deciding not to buy after all. I hope they find a suitable site to purchase soon.

 

[hobo]

The landlord is a bar steward. I hope they find a suitable place but it will not be easy. It is right of them to not pay the ransom money, the asking price was the asking price.

 

[Widgeon]

It sounds disgusting frankly. They're right not to pay, and good to see that they've done everythng by the book. I hope they can find a suitable new home that makes it possible for their existing clients to keep on riding.

 

[Parrotperson]

They literally cannot pay more than its been valued at because the charity commission wont allow it. He's a greedy B*****d and needs a bloody good kicking.

 

[Silver Clouds]

The morally bankrupt landlord clearly doesn't understand how charities work. I hope he isn't able to sell it for any more than the original £1m asked for (hopefully he has to sell it for less). I hope the stables find a lovely new home as soon as possible.

 

[The Jokers Girl]

Shame on those greedy toe rags. I appreciate it is hassle but now they have £1.3mil to play with they should be able to buy or rent alternative accommodation for the charity and be free of their previously landlord. I'm sure if they found somewhere suitable that was a little more the equine community, and I imagine further afield will happily donate. I know I would if they needed some extra

 

[Tarragon]

It would serve the landlords right if they find they cannot now get a buyer willing to pay the inflated value, especially if they cannot now lower the asking price because it is "un-negotiable"

 

[Shooting Star]

I feel so sorry for them after all the hard work they put in fundraising and I sincerely hope that if it gets sold to a property developer that the community join together to send the council thousands of objections for change of use!

 

[Baywonder]

That Landlord is a complete and utter ????

I really do hope someone stitches him / her up over this land - they certainly deserve it. They should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves. Money grabbing ?

I wish PLS the best of luck in securing a new, permanent home very soon.

 

[Frumpoon]

I feel so sorry for them after all the hard work they put in fundraising and I sincerely hope that if it gets sold to a property developer that the community join together to send the council thousands of objections for change of use!

This is exactly right

 

[MuddyMonster]

What a horrible, horrible landlord

I really hope they are able to pull something out the bag to continue running.

 

[PeterNatt]

In view of what has occured I would suggest that the local authority makes a compulsory purchase order onf the property.

 

[Frumpoon]

In view of what has occured I would suggest that the local authority makes a compulsory purchase order onf the property.

What a good idea...can they do that?

 

[shortstuff99]

It did make the BBC breakfast news this morning! Landlord now seems to be making out that they are working to resolve it ?

 

[Hexx]

Oh good - I hoped it would make the BBC News - I saw it on there originally and that's what made me make a donation to them.

 

[Michen]

“ The trustees have been informed that another offer for the property has been received by the landlord at the higher figure. ”

Why should the landlord lose out on 300k? We don’t know their circumstances. How many of you would walk away from that kind of money out of the goodness of your heart?

Unpopular opinion I’m sure, but business head on, and unless any of you can truly know you would walk away from that extra money then I’m not sure you are in a position to judge.

It’s very sad I agree, but it’s the way things are.

 

[Tiddlypom]

That partly depends on whether the landlord has genuinely received a higher offer, or is falsely claiming to have done so (it happens).

I wish them luck in finding new premises.

 

[Michen]

That partly depends on whether the landlord has genuinely received a higher offer, or is falsely claiming to have done so (it happens).

I wish them luck in finding new premises.

Well of course. My post is on the assumption that the offer was genuine.

 

[chaps89]

It just feels a bit coincidental that the new value of the property matches what has been secured by the charity via their fundraising?

 

[Michen]

It just feels a bit coincidental that the new value of the property matches what has been secured by the charity via their fundraising?

I agree. But as I said, if the landlord genuinely got an offer for that amount then I think it’s completely understandable to take it.

It’s 300k, not 30, not 3.. a huge amount of money.

 

[chaps89]

Oh yes, I dont disagree, it's not a small amount at all and commercially that is obviously the choice to make.
Shame on the buyer who gazumped the charity though really (presuming they exist!) But again, it's business and unfortunately these things happen. At least the centre now have funds available for making alternative plans with.

 

[sport horse]

Its bizarre that the higher offer is the exact same amount that the stables raised by crowdfunding ie 1.35m. I know strange things do occur but that is really strange.

 

[Pearlsacarolsinger]

“ The trustees have been informed that another offer for the property has been received by the landlord at the higher figure. ”

Why should the landlord lose out on 300k? We don’t know their circumstances. How many of you would walk away from that kind of money out of the goodness of your heart?

Unpopular opinion I’m sure, but business head on, and unless any of you can truly know you would walk away from that extra money then I’m not sure you are in a position to judge.

It’s very sad I agree, but it’s the way things are.

Possibly because the landlord had already agreed to sell to PLS for £1million, if they could raise the money, which they did. PLS published the amount raised and suddenly the price shot up to that exact amount. It sounds very fishy to me, especially as the owner now says they are 'negotiating' with PLS, who cannot pay more than the valuation. Would you expect to hear that if you had made the higher offer? I wouldn't.

 

[Michen]

Possibly because the landlord had already agreed to sell to PLS for £1million, if they could raise the money, which they did. PLS published the amount raised and suddenly the price shot up to that exact amount. It sounds very fishy to me, especially as the owner now says they are 'negotiating' with PLS, who cannot pay more than the valuation. Would you expect to hear that if you had made the higher offer? I wouldn't.

Who knows. Only those directly involved. If the landlord really did receive an offer as claimed, there’s been some rather unpleasant assumptions made on various social media outlets.

 

[PeterNatt]

Even if they are offered £300,000 more then by the time they have paid Capital Gains Tax at 40% they will only end up with £180,000. more and the chances are is that if the developer purchases it then it wil be a 'conditional purchase' which will probably mean that there will be a long delay between exchange and completion so that the developer can get planning permission and it will probably have an option within the agreement that the purchaser can pull out if they fail to achieve planning with their deposit at exchange returned to them! The seller would be wise to accept the offer that they have as they could well end up with egg in their face!

 

[sport horse]

Even if they are offered £300,000 more then by the time they have paid Capital Gains Tax at 40% they will only end up with £180,000. more and the chances are is that if the developer purchases it then it wil be a 'conditional purchase' which will probably mean that there will be a long delay between exchange and completion so that the developer can get planning permission and it will probably have an option within the agreement that the purchaser can pull out if they fail to achieve planning with their deposit at exchange returned to them! The seller would be wise to accept the offer that they have as they could well end up with egg in their face!

One can only hope that the 'egg in the face' comes to fruition. At the moment the landlord is unknown but it would be surprising if the press do not name and shame.

 

[Frumpoon]

One can only hope that the 'egg in the face' comes to fruition. At the moment the landlord is unknown but it would be surprising if the press do not name and shame.

A £3 search on the Land Registry would make this known....its very easy, i've done it several times

 

[Michen]

Even if they are offered £300,000 more then by the time they have paid Capital Gains Tax at 40% they will only end up with £180,000. more and the chances are is that if the developer purchases it then it wil be a 'conditional purchase' which will probably mean that there will be a long delay between exchange and completion so that the developer can get planning permission and it will probably have an option within the agreement that the purchaser can pull out if they fail to achieve planning with their deposit at exchange returned to them! The seller would be wise to accept the offer that they have as they could well end up with egg in their face!

“Only” 180k? If this is the case, and the landlord truly has an offer like this, then I can see why the risk of what you mentioned may well be worth it. It may be that the property would be extremely likely to sell for the original value should it fall through.

I am not saying for one minute that the other offer is definitely real, it probably isn’t, but if it is I just find it astounding that anyone expects a landlord to loose 300k or 180k as you put it out of the goodness of their heart. We have no ideas what their circumstances are.

Why should they be named and shamed unless it is 100% factual that they made the offer up, in which case fair enough!

 

[Pearlsacarolsinger]

Why should they be named and shamed unless it is 100% factual that they made the offer up, in which case fair enough!

Because the arrangement with PLS was that they could buy the site if they could raise £1million, (as I understand it).