AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·10 October 2019

First-tier Tribunal Allows Landlord's Costs Under s.60

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal allowed the landlord's costs under s.60 of the Leasehold Reform Act 1993. This means the landlord can recover reasonable costs related to granting a new lease to the tenant.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord may recover reasonable costs for investigating a tenant's right to a new lease under s.60 of the Leasehold Reform Act 1993.

Topics

cost recoveryleasehold reformreasonable costs

Provisions

Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 s.60

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal allowed the landlord's costs under s.60 of the Leasehold Reform Act 1993.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal allowed the landlord's costs under s.60 of the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993, finding the costs reasonable and within the scope of the section.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

Case Reference : CHI/43UD/OLR/2019/0050

Property : 15 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Applicant: [redacted] : [NAME]

Respondent: [redacted] : [RESPONDENT] of Application : s.60 Costs

Tribunal Members : Judge D Dovar

Date of Decision : 19th September 2019

_______________________________________________

DECISION ____________________________________

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2 1. This an application under s.60 of the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 for the determination of the costs payable for the claim by the Applicants for a new lease of their flat.

2. Directions were given on 31st May 2019 which stated that the issue of s.60 costs would be dealt with without a hearing unless either party requested a hearing; neither has.

3. Section 60 permits a landlord to recover their reasonable costs of and incidental to their investigation of the tenant’s right to a new lease, a valuation of the premium payable and the grant of a new lease. Although s.60 does not stretch to the cost of proceedings before this tribunal.

4. The Respondent has provided a bundle with the breakdown of their costs of claim, being £2,600.50 plus VAT for legal fees and £840 plus VAT for surveyor fees. They have confirmed in their submissions dated 13th August 2019 that these are costs in relation to the notice of claim and within the remit set out above.

5. The Applicant has not engaged in the issue of costs and has not filed any objection to the costs claimed.

6. The Tribunal considers that the costs are reasonable and fall within s.60 and allows them in full. Judge D Dovar

3 Appeals

A person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) must seek permission to do so by making written application to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case.

The application must arrive at the Tribunal within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision.

If the person wishing to appeal does not comply with the 28-day time limit, the person shall include with the application for permission to appeal a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28- day time limit; the Tribunal will then decide whether to extend time or not to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed.

The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party making the application is seeking.

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

Allowed7 cases

Dismissed4 cases

Allowed in Part1 case

First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Financial Penalty Reduced in Housing Act Case

A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

The claimant is entitled to a rent that reflects the open market value adjusted for their ability to pay.
The Tribunal allows appeals out of time if satisfied there is a good reason for the delay.
The value of a short leasehold interest is determined using approved relativity graphs when market evidence is lacking.
A landlord can obtain dispensation from consultation requirements if the works are urgent and necessary for safety.
Tenants are entitled to have their individual liability for service charges accurately calculated and apportioned.

❌ Tends to be rejected

Properties are exempt from the right to buy if they are particularly suitable for elderly persons and were first let before 1 January 1990.
The Tribunal does not allow appeals out of time if the claimant cannot provide a good reason for the delay.
Properties must meet certain size requirements to be considered suitable for human habitation under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The decision allowed the landlord's costs under s.60 of the Leasehold Reform Act 1993.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided that the landlord could recover reasonable costs because the tenant did not object to the costs claimed.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 s.60 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was that the costs claimed by the landlord were reasonable and fell within the scope of s.60.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the landlord.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should ensure they understand the costs they might incur and consider objecting if they believe the costs are unreasonable.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The landlord provided a bundle with the breakdown of their costs, including legal and surveyor fees.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) must seek permission to do so within 28 days.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is always recommended to get advice from a qualified solicitor for a case like this.

Official source: First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) — headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.