First-tier Tribunal Approves Pitch Fee Increase Based on CPI

OUTCOME: Allowed

1 © CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025

Case Reference : HAV/45UC/PHI/2025/0700 Property : 6 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicant: [redacted] Respondent : [redacted] : Review of Pitch Fee: Mobile Homes Act 1983 (as amended) “The Act” Tribunal Members : Judge C A Rai Type of Hearing : Determination on the papers without a hearing Rule 9 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013 Date of Decision : 1 October 2025

DECISION

1. The Tribunal determines that the pitch fee for the Property shall be increase by 2.5% from 1 January 2025 in line with the annual change in the Consumer Prices Index (CPI). The monthly pitch fee payable from that date is £239.20. 2. The reasons for the Tribunal’s decision are set out below.

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2 Background 3. The Applicant served a pitch fee review notice on the [NAME] [APPELLANT] at the Property dated 21 November 2024. This notice confirmed that the monthly pitch fee, due for review on 1 January 2025, would be increased by 2.5%. It explained that the notice was being given in accordance with the requirements of the Act and that the percentage increase applied was the change in the CPI for the preceding 12 months. At the date of the notice, the last published CPI figure for October 2024 was 2.5%.

4. The occupier was invited to agree the increase but also informed that the if she did not agree she was entitled to apply to the Tribunal for a determination.

5. The Applicant applied to the Tribunal for it to determine the pitch fee increase for the Property on 17 March 2025. The named Respondent is the Executors of Mrs [RESPONDENT]. A copy of a letter sent to the Respondent dated 17 March 2025 was enclosed with the application which letter had offered another opportunity to the Respondent to agree to the increase.

6. The Applicant has provided a copy of a notice of assignment confirming that the occupation agreement was transferred to Mrs [NAME] on 22 July 2020 and that at that time she was the only named occupier of the mobile home on the pitch.

7. The Tribunal issued initial directions to the parties dated 23 June 2025 in which, amongst other things, it:- a. Identified that it had not received a copy of the written occupation agreement. b. Enquired whether the Respondent wished to challenge the review date identified (1 January). c. Notified the parties that they could appoint representatives. d. Confirmed that the papers received would constitute the Applicant’s case and e. Directed the Respondent to complete a pro forma reply form and if it objected to the application supply a statement, witness statements and any other documents on which it sought to rely. Time limits were given for the parties compliance with the directions.

8. Predetermination Directions were issued by the tribunal on 6 August 2025, which identified that the Tribunal considered that the application remained suitable for determination without a hearing and which recorded that:- a. Neither the Applicant or the Respondent provided any response to the initial directions, and the Respondent has not responded to the Tribunal at any stage of the proceedings. b. There had been no request for an oral hearing. c. A copy of the determination would be sent to both parties.

3 9. The Tribunal has seen the Application, the pitch fee review notice and the letter sent to the Applicant which accompanied it. It is satisfied that both the Applicant and Respondent were sent both sets of the direction issued by the Tribunal.

10. The Tribunal has noted that: a. The Applicant has not supplied any evidence which explains how it became aware that Mrs [APPELLANT] had died. b. The Applicant has not identified if is aware that executors have been appointed to administer the estate of the [NAME] [RESPONDENT] c. All correspondence addressed to the Respondent has been sent to the Property. d. The Applicant has not responded to any Directions or correspondence sent to it by the Tribunal after it made the application. e. No response has been received by the Tribunal from the Respondence at any stage of these proceedings.

11. The Tribunal has discovered, as the result of its own enquiries, that [NAME] [NAME] whose last address was [ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], Bognor Regis, P022 9SN died on 10 February 2025. The Law 12. All agreements to which the Act applies incorporate standard terms implied by the Act. The terms which apply to protected sites in England are contained in Chapter 2 of the Part 1 of Schedule 1. The principles governing changes in pitch fees are in paragraphs 16 to 20.

13. A review of the pitch fee can be undertaken annually on the review date. (Paragraph 17(1)). The owner must serve a written notice setting out the proposals in respect of the new pitch fee on the occupier at least 28 days before the proposed review date.

14. Paragraph 16 of Chapter 2 of Schedule 1 to the Act provides that the pitch fee can only be changed in two ways:- a. with the agreement of the occupier of the pitch, or b. if the Tribunal, on the application of the owner or occupier, considers it reasonable for the pitch fee to be changed and makes an order determining the amount of the new pitch fee.

15. If the pitch fee is agreed by the occupier, it will be payable from the pitch fee review date (17(3)).

16. If the occupier does not agree the change in the pitch fee the owner can apply to the Tribunal for an order determining the amount of the new pitch fee which will be determined in accordance with paragraph 16(b). The occupier remains liable for payment of the current pitch fee until such time as the new pitch fee is agreed by the occupier, or an order is made by the Tribunal.

4 17. The new pitch fee will be payable from the review date, but an occupier will not be treated as being in arrears until 28 days after either the date on which the new pitch fee is agreed, or the Tribunal makes an order determining it. (17(4)).

18. There is a time limit within which an application to the Tribunal must be submitted, but since the Respondent has not disputed the procedural validity of the pitch fee notices it is unnecessary, in these proceedings, for this Tribunal to say more about that.

19. In summary, paragraph 18 provides that on a pitch fee review “particular regard” is to be had to:- a. sums expended by the owner on improvements since the last review date; b. any deterioration in the condition and any decrease in the amenity of the site or adjoining land owned or controlled by the owner since 26 May 2013 “insofar as regard has not previously been had to that deterioration or decrease for the purposes of this subparagraph” ; c. any reduction in, or deterioration in the quality of services supplied by the owner since 26 May 2013 to which regard has not previously been had; and d. any direct effect of legislation which has come into force since the last review date on the costs payable by the owner on the maintenance or management of the site.

20. Paragraph 20 is the starting point for the Tribunal’s jurisdiction when considering what order it should make. It provides that unless this would be unreasonable, there is a presumption that a pitch fee will increase, or decrease, in line with the change in CPI during the last 12 months (Tribunal’s emphasis).

21. CPI increased by 2.5% during the relevant 12 month period applicable for the revies the subject of this application . Although directed to supply evidence supporting the proposed CPI increase the Applicant did not, but the Tribunal is satisfied that the percentage increase relied upon by the Applicant is correct.

22. The Tribunal can refer to paragraph 18(1) of Chapter 2 of Schedule 1 to the Act and decide if it would be unreasonable to apply the presumption.

23. The matters referred to, in relation to which the Tribunal can have particular regard include both improvements made to the site by the owner since the last review date and deterioration in the condition, and any decrease in the amenity of the site or any adjoining land occupied or controlled by the owner since the date the paragraph came into force.

24. The presumption of the increase in the pitch fee can however be displaced if anything in paragraph 18 is relevant, or if there are other factors of “sufficient weight”.

5 25. Case law suggests that the starting point is that the Tribunal must decide if it is reasonable for the amount of the pitch fee to change (paragraph 16(1)) but thereafter it is within its discretion to determine the increase proposed.

26. The Upper Tribunal has given guidance to this Tribunal in a number of cases. In [COMPANY] v Bamborough [2016] UKUT 144 (LC) it identified three basic principles which it said shaped the statutory approach to pitch fee review in paragraph 19 of its decision.

27. Firstly, the pitch fee can only be changed either (a) with the agreement of the occupier, or (b) if the appropriate judicial body, following an application by either party, considers it reasonable for the pitch fee to be changed and makes an order determining the amount of the new pitch fee. Secondly if Para 17(1) is followed, so the machinery for the proposed increase has been correctly undertaken on the correct dates using the prescribed form of notice. Thirdly when the statutory presumption has been taken into account, (Para 20), and the proposed increase is in line with the change in RPI (up or down) and calculated by reference to the latest published index for the month which was 12 months before that to which the latest index relates.

28. The decision stated that “The FTT is given a very strong steer that a change in RPI the previous 12 months will make it reasonable for the pitch fee to be changed by that amount but is provided with only [COMPANY] guidance on what other factors it ought to take into account” (paragraph 22). The Upper Tribunal went on to decide that the increase or decrease in RPI only gives rise to a presumption, not an entitlement or a maximum, and that in some cases, it would only be a starting point to the determination.

29. In other words, if the presumption that the change [COMPANY] by RPI produced an unreasonable result, the Tribunal could rebut it. “It is clear, however, that other matters are relevant and that annual RPI increases are not the beginning and end of the determination because paragraphs 18 and 19 specifically identify matters which the FTT is required to take into account or to ignore when undertaking a review”. [Since 2 July 2023 the RPI has been substituted with the CPI.] Reasons for the Decision 30. In the absence of any submissions on the part of the Respondent the Tribunal has considered the proposed increase and concluded that it has received no evidence that there is any reason to displace the presumption that the pitch fee due on the pitch fee review date should increase by 2.5%.

6 31. The Tribunal acknowledges that it has not seen the pitch fee agreement but is satisfied that the [NAME] [RESPONDENT] and the Respondent has had sufficient time between the service of the pitch fee review notice and the issue of the last Tribunal directions (between 21 November 2024 and 6 August 2025) to respond and/or comment on the application and these proceedings.

32. The Tribunal determines that the pitch fee for the property shall be increased by 2.5% in line with the increase in the CPI for the preceding 12 months prior to the date that the pitch fee review notice was sent to the Respondent.

33. The pitch fee payable from 1 January 2025 is £239.20. Judge C A Rai

Appeals 1. A person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper 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.

2. 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. Where possible you should send your further application for permission to appeal by email to [EMAIL] as this will enable the First-tier Tribunal to deal with it more efficiently.

3. 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.

4. 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.