UPDATED The company that runs Putney Leisure Centre, Places Leisure, asked its café owner Jeannine Angel to sign away her right to stay in the building – a move her solicitor says proves the company botched the original paperwork when she moved in a decade ago.
Angel refused to sign the form, which would have stripped her of legal protections that stop landlords forcing out business tenants. More than 400 people have now signed a petition supporting her fight to stay, but the company declined to clarify its position on her tenant rights.
The request came in June, two weeks after Places Leisure admitted a “misunderstanding” over a disputed shutdown of The Kitchen café the month before.
As Putney.news reported last month, Angel was told to close immediately following an inspection, then allowed to reopen after her solicitor complained.
Now it’s emerged that during that dispute, Places Leisure chased Angel to sign a form called an LTBT3 – a declaration giving up security of tenure under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.
Angel’s solicitor told the company that asking for the form years after she started trading was “a clear admission” that proper procedures weren’t followed when she originally signed her lease. Without a valid LTBT3 signed at the outset, her tenancy has full statutory protection.
Places Leisure promised to provide evidence it had done the paperwork correctly. More than five months later, that evidence hasn’t arrived. The company says it responded to two letters from Angel’s solicitor on 5 November but declined to share what was in those responses.
Places Leisure declined to comment on the specifics of ongoing legal discussions.
What happened in June
On 3 June, an assistant general manager at Places Leisure emailed Angel asking her to sign a form called an LTBT3 as part of a process she was going through to extend her contract. The email said: “Upon reviewing your document folders, I noticed that the LTBT3 form is missing although I have your signed Sub Underlease.”
This came two weeks after Places Leisure’s legal team had told Angel she could reopen following May’s disputed closure, describing the shutdown as a “misunderstanding” following a formal complaint from Angel’s solicitor.
An LTBT3 is a statutory declaration that allows landlords and tenants to agree to contract out of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. That law gives business tenants security of tenure – the right to stay in their premises when a lease ends, ask for a new lease, and claim compensation if they’re forced to leave.
The form sent to Angel included the warning that she was being offered a lease without security of tenure and noted within it that she should not sign it unless she had discussed it with a professional adviser. So she did.
The form listed what she’d be giving up:
- No right to stay in the premises when the lease end
- Unless the landlord chooses to offer another lease, she would have to leave
- No claim for compensation for the loss of business premises
Without a valid LTBT3 signed at the start of a tenancy, those protections remain in place automatically.
‘A clear admission’
Angel’s solicitor responded the same day. His letter argued that the request was a clear admission and confirmation that the proper procedure hadn’t been followed when Angel originally signed her lease in 2015.
Angel’s lawyer made it plain she would not be signing the form, or any other retrospective documentation that would remove her business’ rights.
Without a properly completed LTBT3 at the time the lease was signed, Angel’s tenancy has full protection under the 1954 Act. That would give her security of tenure at Putney Leisure Centre – meaning she can’t simply be told to leave when her current lease ends.
Places Leisure’s legal team replied saying it would provide evidence or its position later. Over five months later, that evidence has yet to arrive.
Clarity still lacking
Since Putney.news reported on Angel’s situation on 20 October, her solicitor has written to Places Leisure twice seeking clarity on her legal position.
Places Leisure says it responded to both letters on 5 November but declined to share the content of those responses with Putney.news.
The letters are understood to ask Places Leisure to clarify its position on Angel’s tenant rights and whether it accepts she has security of tenure given the apparent problems with the original paperwork.
We asked Places Leisure whether it had provided the evidence it promised in June, whether it accepts that Angel’s tenancy has statutory protection, and why it has not responded to her solicitor’s requests despite acknowledging them.
The company declined to answer, saying: “Due to the nature of the discussions, we are unable to provide further information at this time.”
Community support
Angel has run The Kitchen at Putney Leisure Centre since 2015, serving homemade Venezuelan food including arepas, empanadas and tequeños – fried cheese sticks that have become popular with regulars. She’s operated for most of that time with top marks for hygiene from the Food Standards Agency.
“This place feels like home,” Angel told Putney.news last month. “This is my community.”
Since the October story, she’s launched a petition asking Places Leisure to let her stay. It’s signed by regular users of the leisure centre and Putney residents who want to see The Kitchen remain.
“I’m overwhelmed by the support,” Angel says. “People have been coming up to me saying they don’t want us to go. Some have been bringing their children here for years. It means everything to know the community is behind us.”
The centre is preparing for a major refurbishment as part of a £24 million investment programme across Wandsworth’s leisure centres. Angel believes she’s being pushed out to make way for changes to food and drink provision.
Update, 12 November 2025: Places Leisure responded on the morning of publication to say it had replied to both letters from Jeannine Angel’s solicitor on 5 November. The company declined to share those responses or clarify whether it accepts Angel has security of tenure. The article has been updated to reflect that responses were sent, though their content remains unclear.
