Further to recent Government advice we feel it appropriate to close our offices and move our teams to working from home during these difficult times. We will therefore be working remotely to continue helping our clients and customers and will take all possible steps to ensure service levels remain high during these rather challenging times.
Please call the normal office telephone lines as your calls will continue to be answered and forwarded to the appropriate member of staff..
We appreciate how difficult and uncertain this period will be for everyone but we would like to reassure you that during it we will do all we can to help.
Thank you for your understanding. Stay safe and well.
Please complete the form below and we'll contact you about your appraisal.
I wonder if a recent Court ruling in Scotland will impact on English decisions next? They often have done in the past.
Ever since 1995 there has been a disparity between AHA tenancy rents and FBT rents. FBT rents are judged on the evidence in the open market where land to let is competed for. These tend to show a premium above established AHA sitting tenant rent levels which are based more often on budgets and production figures and costs. The recent decision of the “Capital Investment Incorporation of Montreal Limited versus Elliott” case in Scotland may indicate a change - if market rent evidence will now be allowed in the negotiations for AHA reviews.
It might seem inconsistent to a layman that a similar piece of agricultural land can have such a wide range of rental value just because it is an AHA or an FBT tenancy. There are tried and tested reasons but nevertheless the disparity would seem ‘odd’. In spite of this recent Court case it may be unlikely that the two levels will merge as there are genuine reasons for one being higher than the other. Nevertheless, farmers and professionals alike might wish to note the potential change in the air following the decision from the Scottish Courts.