Can a freeholder refuse the Right to Manage?

If you are thinking about the Right to Manage, somebody has probably already told you your freeholder will simply refuse. It is the most common worry leaseholders raise, and it rests on a misunderstanding of what the right actually is.

Your freeholder does not get a vote. What they get is a narrow set of technical objections, a strict deadline to raise them, and a tribunal that decides who is right.

Is the Right to Manage actually a right?

Yes. The Right to Manage is a statutory right created by the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, and qualifying leaseholders can exercise it without proving the freeholder has done anything wrong. You do not need to show poor management, overcharging or neglect. You do not need the freeholder to agree.

That separates RTM from the other routes open to unhappy leaseholders. Applying to the tribunal for appointment of a manager requires you to prove fault. RTM does not. If your building qualifies and you follow the procedure, the right transfers.

What can a freeholder do to oppose an RTM claim?

They can serve a counter notice under section 84 of the 2002 Act, and that is essentially the whole of their power. Section 84 gives no general discretion to refuse. A counter notice has to allege that a specific statutory provision means your RTM company was not entitled to the right on the relevant date.

In plain terms, they cannot argue that the building is well managed already, that they have owned it for thirty years, or that they would rather keep control. Those are opinions, and the Act does not care about them. They have to point at a rule and say you failed it.

The counter notice date on your claim notice must be at least one month after the claim notice itself. That is their window.

What happens if the freeholder serves a counter notice?

Your RTM company applies to the First-tier Tribunal for a determination, and you have two months from the date of the counter notice to do it. Miss that deadline and the claim ceases to have effect, which is a harder deadline than most leaseholders realise.

The tribunal then decides one question: was the company entitled to acquire the right on the relevant date? If the answer is yes, management transfers whatever the freeholder thinks about it.

Who pays if the claim fails?

This changed on 3 March 2025 and most of what you will read online is now out of date, so it is worth being precise.

Section 87A of the 2002 Act, inserted by the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, says an RTM company and its members are not liable for costs incurred by anyone else as a result of a claim notice. That is the general rule, and it replaced a regime where the RTM company picked up the landlord's reasonable costs automatically whenever a claim was withdrawn or failed.

There is an exception, and it is the part people miss. Under section 87B a tribunal can still order the RTM company to pay, and where it does, every current and former member becomes jointly and severally liable alongside the company. Several conditions all have to be met. The claim notice must have been withdrawn or ceased to have effect, and the tribunal must find that the company acted unreasonably in giving the notice or in not withdrawing it sooner.

So the honest summary is that personal liability did not disappear. It stopped being automatic. Before March 2025 a failed claim meant a bill. Now it means a bill only if a tribunal decides you behaved unreasonably, which is a very different risk to carry into a decision.

What grounds do freeholders actually use?

Technical defects in the paperwork, far more often than arguments about whether your building qualifies. The Law Commission found that objections to the form and content of notices are used frequently, and appellate cases bear that out.

The grounds fall into a small number of families. The premises may not qualify, for example where non residential parts exceed a quarter of the internal floor area. The company may not have been properly constituted, or membership may fall short of the statutory threshold. Participation notices may have been missed or served wrongly. Somebody entitled to receive the claim notice may not have received it.

The Supreme Court looked at exactly this in 2024, in A1 Properties (Sunderland) Ltd v Tudor Studios RTM Co Ltd [2024] UKSC 27. An intermediate landlord had been left off the claim notice entirely. Rather than treating that as fatal, the court asked whether the omitted party had lost a real opportunity to raise an objection that was actually available to them. Because that party was later joined and heard, the transfer stood.

That does not make procedure optional. Claims still fail on paperwork, and the Upper Tribunal has struck down claims where prescribed explanatory notes were left out of participation notices altogether. Getting the notices right remains the single most useful thing you can do to protect a claim, which is why our notice templates follow the prescribed forms exactly.

Can the freeholder delay the process indefinitely?

No, because the timetable is statutory rather than negotiated. Every stage has a fixed deadline, including an acquisition date at least three months after the counter notice date, and none of them is in the freeholder's gift.

What a determined freeholder can do is use the process rather than break it. The Law Commission heard evidence of landlords serving counter notices, forcing a tribunal application, then conceding shortly before the hearing. That costs you time, but it does not defeat a valid claim.

What if the freeholder ignores the notice or cannot be found?

Silence works in your favour. If everyone entitled to receive the claim notice has been properly served and no counter notice arrives, there is deemed to be no dispute and the right transfers on the date in your notice. Ignoring you is not a strategy.

If you cannot find the landlord at all, section 85 covers it. Your RTM company notifies the qualifying tenants and applies to the tribunal for an order that the right be acquired. The tribunal may ask you to make further efforts to trace them first.

What should you do if your freeholder is being difficult?

Keep records of everything, because dates decide these cases. Which notices went out, to whom, when, and how they were served. If a dispute reaches the tribunal, that record is your case.

You have tools before it gets there. Sections 82 and 83 let your RTM company require information from the landlord and inspect documents. If they will not comply, the tribunal can order them to.

Most claims that run into trouble were vulnerable from the start rather than defeated by a clever freeholder. Check if your building qualifies, and read the full RTM process to see where the pressure points are.

Frequently asked questions

Can a freeholder refuse the Right to Manage?

No. The Right to Manage is a no-fault statutory right under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. A freeholder can serve a counter notice arguing that the RTM company was not entitled to the right, but they cannot refuse simply because they object to losing management.

How long does a freeholder have to respond to an RTM claim notice?

The counter notice date specified in the claim notice must be at least one month after the date of the claim notice. If no counter notice is served by that date, there is deemed to be no dispute and the right to manage transfers on the acquisition date.

What happens if the freeholder serves a counter notice?

The RTM company must apply to the First-tier Tribunal within two months of the counter notice for a determination that it was entitled to acquire the right. If no application is made within that period, the claim notice ceases to have effect.

Do leaseholders pay the freeholder's costs if an RTM claim fails?

Not automatically, since 3 March 2025. Section 87A of the 2002 Act provides that an RTM company and its members are not liable for another person's costs. Under section 87B a tribunal can still order the company to pay, and current and former members are then jointly and severally liable, but only where the claim notice was withdrawn or ceased to have effect and the company acted unreasonably.

What if the freeholder cannot be found?

Section 85 of the 2002 Act applies. The RTM company gives notice to the qualifying tenants and applies to the First-tier Tribunal for an order that the right to manage be acquired. The tribunal may require further attempts to trace the missing landlord before making an order.

This article is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every situation is different. If you need guidance specific to your building or lease, please consult a qualified solicitor.