APA Property

APA Property Services Ltd.

Open letter to the Chancellor Rishi Sunak MP

The Rt Hon Rishi Sunak MP

Chancellor of the Exchequer

By email: rishi.sunak.mp@parliament.uk; CEU.enquiries@hmtreasury.gov.uk; greg.smith.mp@parliament.uk

Dear Chancellor

Re: Exclusion of grants to companies with serviced offices and limited PAYE compensation

I am writing to you as a member of the UK residential surveying community, which includes members of the Residential Property Surveyors Association (RPSA), the Independent Surveyors and Valuers Association (ISVA) Chartered Association of Building Engineers (CABE), as one of many small businesses left with little or no financial support during the coronavirus crisis.

Like many other surveyors, I operate as an independent business and am affected in five key ways:-

1. I operate under a limited company and derive a significant proportion of our income through dividends and strictly within HMRC requirements. This means that the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme will only provide a monthly income of £500 as 80% of my basic PAYE income

2. As with many small businesses, I have a serviced office lease and do not pay independent business rates. Therefore, apparently, as an employer I am not eligible for any grants under the Small Business Grant Fund.

3. Uniquely, Surveyors have received specific guidance from the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government preventing us from performing our duties except where surveys are deemed to be “urgent”. However, the circumstances that would make a survey urgent are not described and are, realistically, likely to be extremely rare. Hence it is not possible for me to earn any money during the crisis.

4. I have furloughed my staff and I am paying them 100% of their salary although I have no obligation to pay anything other than the 80% the government is offering, I do so because I believe in their commitment, skills and more importantly as an employer, I have an obligation during the bad times as well as the good times.

5. I now look to receive the same commitment from the treasury

I know that Greg Smith MP has written to you to highlight the specific concerns of small businesses during this crisis. The Chairman of the RPSA has discussed this matter with Greg and I wholly support the approaches he has made to you.

In his letter to us all, the Prime Minister said, “The Government will do whatever it takes to help you make ends meet and put food on the table”. Simply, Chancellor, the residential surveying community has been largely excluded from that promise.

On behalf of myself, and all of my colleagues in the residential surveying community, can I ask you, please, to consider the following actions, to ensure that we can all be ready to support the housing market when normal circumstances prevail.

1. Allow company directors, who receive their income by means of salary and dividends, to self-declare that their full primary income (including salary and dividends) is from a single business, and to claim under the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme in the same way as other employees. These facts can, of course, be verified later by HMRC should there be any suggestion that attempts have been made to include dividends from other sources.

2. Relax the upper limit of £50,000 of trading profits for the self-employed/company directors.

3. At the appropriate time, and as a priority, provide clear guidance for the public and property professionals to indicate that it is safe to recommence full market activities, including viewings and removals, perhaps with limited social distancing consideration, to promptly restore confidence to buyers and sellers.

I do appreciate that these are exceptional times and that you have put in place some significant support for many working people. But I would urge you to take account of the special needs of surveyors and valuers, and the importance of the housing market to the whole economy, and recognize the unique service that they provide to the economy in keeping the housing market active.

Yours sincerely,

Philip Antino

Judges Comments and Opinions regarding Dr. Antino

  • The party wall world is relatively small, the stage of this world contains a number of well-known players, Mr Antino is one of these well-known players and so are his owners instructing solicitor Mr Ashley Bean of Thirsk Winton

    HHJ Bailey - [2016]
  • The Claimants have a very experienced legal team comprising Mr David Mayall of lambchambers & Mr Ashley Bean of thirsK winton and their surveyro Dr. Philip Antino. The evidence in particular of the Defendant’s plans for both the Accessway and the plans and how it impacted upon the Claimants business was important information that The Defendants ahd not provided when requested.

    HHJ Freedland QC - [2021]
  • "Mr Antino is a palpable witness, Mr Antino's explanation of the unique attributes of the "Thompson Plan" greatly assisted the Court to understand the location and extent of the claimants’ boundaries” (Best & Best v Perkins & Dennis in the County Court at Luton).

    HHJ Hildyard - [2015]
  • The appeal was a preliminary hearing of two points in respect of an Award served by Mr Antino and a surveyor appointed by Mr Antino under s.10(4) on behalf of the Building Owners the Appellants. HHJ Luba QC sitting in the Central London County Court held "In my judgment the Award is valid, the use of s.10(4) was the appropriate procedure given the Building Owners refusal to appoint a surveyor. A dispute had arisen that satisfied s.10 procedures, The Award is an impressive piece of work". Schmid v Hulls and Athananasou).

    HHJ Luba QC - [2016]
  • “Mr Antino is an acknowledged expert in the field of party wall issues.”

    HHJ Murfitt QC 2013 - [2015]
  • “I have known Philip for many years as a surveyor, he is a very good surveyor, as this book shows he is a very good author and this book can only advance his reputation”

    HHJ Philip Bartle QC - [2012]
  • “In the appeal of an ex-parte Award served by Mr Antino on behalf of the respondents, in my judgment the respondent is correct. Mr Antino’s contention that it is not a matter for negotiation directly between one surveyor and the other surveyor’s client. Since I have determined that the ex-parte Award was valid the court is still able to determine the Award and under the statutory powers to modify the Award if appropriate. I am grateful to Mr Antino suggesting that I now determine the Award issue “I accept that Mr Antino’s hourly rate is not in my judgment unreasonable. It follows that the fee set out in the ex-parte Award had been properly justified and I therefore award Mr Antino’s fees”. (Bansal v Myers Romford County Court).

    HHJ Platt - [2007]

Latest Posts

Alex Frame’s Third Surveyor Award of compensation reduced by 50% in May & Crown Ltd v Shipton & Shipton [H20CL085]

Alex Frame (President of the Faculty of Party Wall Surveyors) www.fpws.org.uk was selected as a Third Surveyor, awards excessive damages.H ...

Continue Reading

Injunctions for breach of party wall act 1996: the only legal option

Conaghan & Conaghan v Abdul (2022) Edmonton County Court “return date hearing”This follows the ex-parte injunction of the 11.02.22 Mr Abdul (the Defendant) instructed Mr St ...

Continue Reading

Shah v Ken Power & Lee Kyson [2022] EWHC 209 (QB) Mr Justice Eyre

Appeal in the High Court of Justice Queens Bench Division in relation to an ex temporejudgment of HHJ Parfitt in a party wall matter.  The Appellants were represented by Mr Nick Isaac QC and Mr. Carl Fain on a direct access basis both of Tanfi ...

Continue Reading

Need our Services?

Click the button below to be brought to our inquiry form and we will contact you as soon as possible to discuss. Alternatively, call us on 01245 492495.

GET IN TOUCH