First-tier Tribunal Determines Service Charge Sum Under Leasehold Reform Act

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2016

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AU/OCE/2024/0110 Property : 116 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicants : [redacted] Representative : [COUNSEL] of [NAME] (Solicitors) Respondents : [redacted] Representative : [COUNSEL] of [COMPANY] of application : Determination of “Appropriate Sum” Schedule 5. para.3 (1)(b) Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 Tribunal Member : [NAME] of determination and venue : 26 November 2025 at 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 26 November 2025

DECISION

2 Background 1. This hearing was arranged by Direction of the Tribunal with their Decision of 22 October 2025 (The Decision).

2. The applicant is now the freeholder of the Property. The respondent is the former freeholder of the Property.

3. The Decision at paragraph 13, debarred the respondent from further involvement in this application by reason of their serious and sustained non-compliance with earlier Directions of the First tier Tribunal in the matter. The respondent had been prior warned by the Tribunal of the likely consequences, but persisted. The Decision, was not appealed.

4. The Tribunal, in the Decision at Order 2, required: “By 14 November 2025, the Applicant is to file and serve documents upon which it relies in relation to the determination of the appropriate sum together with a calculation of the likely appropriate sum in respect of the amount of service charges and ground rent payable. These documents are limited to those within the Applicant’s possession relaying to costs incurred, demands for payment make by the Respondent/ their Representative together with proof of any payments made by the [NAME].” Applicant’s Case 5. The applicant provided the information as Ordered above in the time specified. These materials in support of the determination for a particular “Appropriate Sum” were considered by this Tribunal.

6. The applicant provided, attached to their statement, two batches (5No. x A4 sheets and 8No. A4 sheets) said to contain copies of assorted statements from the respondent, sent to [NAME], with records of payments and receipts of same, in support of the amount said to be due, as the “Appropriate Sum”.

7. The applicant provided a supporting statement of 14 November 2025 from [NAME]: “…the service charge demands issued by [NAME] for each of the 8 flats in the building showing amounts demanded and paid.” And “…evidence from flat owners of payment of the payments referred to in the demands…” The applicant set out in a short schedule a list of flats 1-8; of the sums due; of the sums paid. The total due and paid, were identical, totalling £11,943.59. 8. ‘Proofs of payment’ for [NAME] at Flats No.1,2,6,7 & 8 had been provided and for Flats 3 and 4 oral confirmation of same. The leaseholder for Flat 5 could not be easily contacted owing to long term travel but, was reported to only be in dispute of the small amount of £59.07. The leaseholder of Flat 4 was said to be owing £45.

3 9. At paragraph 7 of their statement to the Tribunal the applicant through [NAME] also stated: “If all the accounts are indeed clear, then the amount to be credited to the Applicant would be for the period from 6 January 2026 until 24 March 2026, i.e. 68 days, a sum of £4,459 (£65.44 daily).” And at paragraph 8 of their statement they added: “Although the Respondent is debarred from providing further evidence, it is suggested nonetheless, the Respondent provides updated statements for Flats 3 4 and 5 before 24 November 2025.” Respondent’s Case 10. The respondents did not respond or attempt to respond as suggested by the applicant. The respondents are and remain debarred by the Tribunal from further involvement in this application. Decision 11. The Tribunal found that the applicants complied with the Directions, filed on time and with sufficient appropriate documentation in support of the sum. The Tribunal reviewed the applicants statement, their schedule and the attachments and is content that they provide sufficient accurate detail to show the Appropriate Sum as required.

12. The Tribunal finds the Appropriate Sum for this application, under Schedule 5, paragraph 3(1)(b) of the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993, to be £4,459. Name: [NAME]: 26 November 2025

Rights of appeal

By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, the tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may have.

If either party is dissatisfied with this decision, they may apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on any point of law arising from this Decision.

Prior to making such an appeal, an application must be made, in writing, to this Tribunal for permission to appeal. Any such application must be made within 28 days of the issue of this decision to the person making the application (regulation 52 (2) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rule 2013).

If the application is not made within the 28-day time limit, such application must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for not

4 complying with the 28 day time limit; the tribunal will then look at such reason(s) and decide whether to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit.

The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the tribunal to which it relates (i.e., give the date, the property, and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party making the application is seeking.

If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).