RE: Caterham leaves town

[peter pan]

Drewbagz - The Lotus 7 / Caterham 7 had `its' 50th birthday several years ago, and has therefore been in production a little longer than Porsche. Both outstanding cars in my book but in different ways
Saying that Caterham should get rid of the Seven, is the same as saying that Porsche should completely drop the 911. Dont somehow think they are going to do that.

[Vocal Minority]

Chrisgr31 said:

My assumption would be that at some point in history the Nairn family granted a lease to Caterham Cars of the showroom. It might have happened during their ownership and was done for sound financial reasons to ensure that the property was protected in the event of the company folding, or for pension planning or it might have been done when the company was sold.

The result of any of these options would be that the company would only have a lease of the property and therefore at the end of term of the lease effectively had too go. Arguably they could have bought the freehold, however as it has been sold for residential use that probably did not make commercial sense.

The fault effectively lies with whoever sold the freehold or hived it out the company in the first place, assuming it was ever owned by the company!

This all makes sense, but what precisely is the governments role as has been mentioned? Did they buy the freehold?