[Talk-GB] Subject: Re: Thomas Cook shops

[Edward Bainton]

Legal situation of leases, fixtures and fittings as far as I'm aware:
- Lease continues and rent continues to be payable.
- Liquidator can disclaim the lease, bringing all obligations to an end OR
- Once in arrears/other breach of covenant (such as keeping open for
trade), landlord can deem the lease forfeit: property returns to them
- Once owed 7 days' rent (which could be many months hence if paid
quarterly in advance), landlord has right to impound and liquidate fixtures
and fittings to offset their losses, after some procedural safeguards.

But as SK53 says, eyeballs must be best.

Not a lawyer, just a geek who read this up as a charity trustee.
Corrections gladly received.

On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 09:07, SK53 <sk53.osm at gmail.com> wrote:

> I suspect the fixtures & fittings will be cleared out fairly pronto,
> although not the fascia signage. As the firm has been liquidated I presume
> all leases on retail property are now in default, and consequently null and
> void. Landlords will be anxious to get new tenants as quickly as possible,
> and are likely to clear the shops for that reason. (A certain amount of
> speculation on my part as I don't know what the actual legal situation with
> ownership of fixtures & fittings is in these circumstances). Ether way we
> can learn more by some on-the-ground surveys.
>
> Phones 4U went into administration in September 2014, and their shops were
> cleared out of fittings pretty rapidly, although they remained as visible
> 'ghosts'  on high streets for a long time afterwards.
>
> A nice refinement of the shop=X => shop=vacant;disused:shop=yes would be
> to only go from name=Y to old_name=Y when the signage disappears. Frederic
> Rodrigo talked about pedestrian navigation by landmark at SotM, and
> prominent closed shops (and also pubs) are often useful landmarks. However,
> I think this is still a luxury for the average mapper trying to keep
> somewhere up-to-date.
>
> Jerry
>
> On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 at 14:54, Chris Hill <osm at raggedred.net> wrote:
>
>> Thomas Cook shops are not vacant. They may not be open to the public
>> today, but they may well be reopened by a new owner in the future and that
>> may even be under the Thomas Cook brand if the administrator sells some or
>> all of them to another company. In the mean time they are still branded and
>> still a landmark of sorts.
>>
>> If a shop is emptied or reused by another firm then change that one
>> otherwise I think we should wait for a while to see what happens.
>>
>> cheers
>> Chris Hill (chillly)
>>
>> On 24/09/2019 14:00, Jez Nicholson wrote:
>>
>> I'm a fan of shop=vacant, old_name=Thomas Cook myself
>>
>> You could argue for not:name=Thomas Cook maybe
>>
>> On Tue, 24 Sep 2019, 13:34 Tadeusz Cantwell, <t4dc4n at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I changed the three shops in N.I to disused;shop=travel-agent since I
>>> wasn't sure what the best practice was in this case. Not all of them had
>>> the wiki links etc. Any advice on a better way?
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20190925/1a895a8f/attachment.html>