VadeLab
DismissedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Rejects Service Charge Claims

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) ruled that it could not decide on the reasonableness of and liability to pay sums related to damp proofing works and repairs to an intercom system because these were not considered service charges under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

⚖️ Legal holding

The tribunal has no jurisdiction to determine the reasonableness of and liability to pay sums related to damp proofing works and repairs to an intercom system.

Topics

service chargelandlord and tenant actproperty chamber

Provisions

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.27A

📖 Technical summary

The tribunal lacks jurisdiction to determine the reasonableness of and liability to pay sums related to damp proofing works and repairs to an intercom system.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined it had no jurisdiction to decide on the reasonableness of and liability to pay sums related to damp proofing works and repairs to an intercom system, as these were not considered service charges under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Dismissed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2013

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00AU/LSC/2019/0052 Property : 30a [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : N/A Respondent : [redacted] : N/A Type of Application : For the determination of the reasonableness of and the liability to pay a service charge Tribunal Members : [NAME] J [NAME] and venue of paper determination : 13 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of Decision : 21 May 2019

DECISION

2

Decisions of the tribunal (1) The tribunal determines that it has no jurisdiction to determine any of the matters it has been requested to determine by an application purportedly made under S27a of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 dated 5 February 2019. The application 1. The Applicant seeks determinations purportedly pursuant to S27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the 1985 Act”) of the liability of the landlord and/or tenant to pay certain sums of money.

2. The relevant legal provisions are set out in the Appendix to this decision. The hearing 3. These sums of money were initially thought by the tribunal to relate to service charges and directions for the progress of the case were issued on 7 February 2019. These provided for a determination to be made on the papers, directed to be submitted, in the week commencing 13 May 2019 unless either party requested an oral hearing which neither party did. The tribunal considered the documents submitted on 13 May 2019. The background 4. The property which is the subject of this application is a two bedroomed self-contained flat on the ground floor of a Victorian terraced house which has been converted into three flats.

5. Neither party requested an inspection and the tribunal did not consider that one was necessary, nor would it have been proportionate to the issues in dispute.

6. The Applicant holds a long lease of the property which requires the landlord to provide services and the tenant to contribute towards their costs by way of a variable service charge. The issues 7. From the documents submitted it is now clear that what the applicant tenant is seeking is a declaration from the tribunal that certain damp proofing works carried out on behalf of the tenant at his own expense in 2014 and 2017 were in fact the landlord’s liability under the lease and

3 that the landlord should reimburse the tenant. The tenant also sought a tribunal determination that a sum of £294.66 demanded from him by the landlord in 2015 said to be to repair “wilful damage” caused to the entry intercom installation by the tenant was not payable by him.

8. Having read the evidence and submissions from the parties and considered all of the documents provided, the tribunal has decided that it has no jurisdiction to determine these issues for the reasons given below. Jurisdiction 9. The tribunal’s justifications arise out of Acts of Parliament. S27A of the Act gives the tribunal jurisdiction to determine the reasonableness of and the liability to pay a service charge under the provisions of a lease which permit a landlord to recover the costs of fulfilling his obligations in respect of a building from the tenants of the building. Sums paid out by a tenant to a contractor he has engaged to undertake damp-proofing works to a flat he holds on a long lease are not a service charge. Whether or not those works were the obligation of the landlord to undertake under the provisions of the lease with the costs to be recovered through a service charge is not an issue which the Act gives this tribunal jurisdiction to decide.

10. The money demanded of the tenant by the landlord in respect of alleged damage to the door entry intercom is again not a service charge. It is not the tenant’s service charge share of the cost of a repair carried out by the landlord; it is the whole amount claimed as a result of what was said to be wilful damage by the tenant. Whether the landlord had any right to make such a claim under the provisions of the lease is not in point nor that the sum might have been recovered as part of a judgement sum awarded in the County Court in 2018; it is clearly not a service charge and again the tribunal has no jurisdiction in respect of this item.

11. The application has clearly been misconceived and must be dismissed together with the linked applications for Orders under S20C of the Act and Paragraph 5A of Schedule 11 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. Name: [NAME]: 21 May 2019

4 ANNEX - RIGHTS OF APPEAL

1. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) then a written application for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case.

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

3. 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 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.

4. 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.

5 Appendix of relevant legislation

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (as amended) Section 18 (1) In the following provisions of this Act "service charge" means an amount payable by a tenant of a dwelling as part of or in addition to the rent - (a) which is payable, directly or indirectly, for services, repairs, maintenance, improvements or insurance or the landlord's costs of management, and (b) the whole or part of which varies or may vary according to the relevant costs. (2) The relevant costs are the costs or estimated costs incurred or to be incurred by or on behalf of the landlord, or a superior landlord, in connection with the matters for which the service charge is payable. (3) For this purpose - (a) "costs" includes overheads, and (b) costs are relevant costs in relation to a service charge whether they are incurred, or to be incurred, in the period for which the service charge is payable or in an earlier or later period. Section 19 (1) Relevant costs shall be taken into account in determining the amount of a service charge payable for a period - (a) only to the extent that they are reasonably incurred, and (b) where they are incurred on the provisions of services or the carrying out of works, only if the services or works are of a reasonable standard; and the amount payable shall be limited accordingly. (2) Where a service charge is payable before the relevant costs are incurred, no greater amount than is reasonable is so payable, and after the relevant costs have been incurred any necessary adjustment shall be made by repayment, reduction or subsequent charges or otherwise. Section 27A (1) An application may be made to the appropriate tribunal for a determination whether a service charge is payable and, if it is, as to - (a) the person by whom it is payable, (b) the person to whom it is payable, (c) the amount which is payable,

6 (d) the date at or by which it is payable, and (e) the manner in which it is payable. (2) Subsection (1) applies whether or not any payment has been made. (3) An application may also be made to the appropriate tribunal for a determination whether, if costs were incurred for services, repairs, maintenance, improvements, insurance or management of any specified description, a service charge would be payable for the costs and, if it would, as to - (a) the person by whom it would be payable, (b) the person to whom it would be payable, (c) the amount which would be payable, (d) the date at or by which it would be payable, and (e) the manner in which it would be payable. (4) No application under subsection (1) or (3) may be made in respect of a matter which - (a) has been agreed or admitted by the tenant, (b) has been, or is to be, referred to arbitration pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement to which the tenant is a party, (c) has been the subject of determination by a court, or (d) has been the subject of determination by an arbitral tribunal pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement. (5) But the tenant is not to be taken to have agreed or admitted any matter by reason only of having made any payment. Section 20 (1) Where this section applies to any qualifying works or qualifying long term agreement, the relevant contributions of tenants are limited in accordance with subsection (6) or (7) (or both) unless the consultation requirements have been either— (a) complied with in relation to the works or agreement, or (b) dispensed with in relation to the works or agreement by (or on appeal from) the appropriate tribunal . (2) In this section “relevant contribution”, in relation to a tenant and any works or agreement, is the amount which he may be required under the terms of his lease to contribute (by the payment of service charges) to relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works or under the agreement. (3) This section applies to qualifying works if relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works exceed an appropriate amount. (4) The Secretary of State may by regulations provide that this section applies to a qualifying long term agreement—

7 (a) if relevant costs incurred under the agreement exceed an appropriate amount, or (b) if relevant costs incurred under the agreement during a period prescribed by the regulations exceed an appropriate amount. (5) An appropriate amount is an amount set by regulations made by the Secretary of State; and the regulations may make provision for either or both of the following to be an appropriate amount— (a) an amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations, and (b) an amount which results in the relevant contribution of any one or more tenants being an amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations. (6) Where an appropriate amount is set by virtue of paragraph (a) of subsection (5), the amount of the relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works or under the agreement which may be taken into account in determining the relevant contributions of tenants is limited to the appropriate amount. (7) Where an appropriate amount is set by virtue of paragraph (b) of that subsection, the amount of the relevant contribution of the tenant, or each of the tenants, whose relevant contribution would otherwise exceed the amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations is limited to the amount so prescribed or determined.] Section 20B (1) If any of the relevant costs taken into account in determining the amount of any service charge were incurred more than 18 months before a demand for payment of the service charge is served on the tenant, then (subject to subsection (2)), the tenant shall not be liable to pay so much of the service charge as reflects the costs so incurred. (2) Subsection (1) shall not apply if, within the period of 18 months beginning with the date when the relevant costs in question were incurred, the tenant was notified in writing that those costs had been incurred and that he would subsequently be required under the terms of his lease to contribute to them by the payment of a service charge. Section 20C (1) A tenant may make an application for an order that all or any of the costs incurred, or to be incurred, by the landlord in connection with proceedings before a court, residential property tribunal or the Upper Tribunal, or in connection with arbitration proceedings, are

8 not to be regarded as relevant costs to be taken into account in determining the amount of any service charge payable by the tenant or any other person or persons specified in the application. (2) The application shall be made— (a) in the case of court proceedings, to the court before which the proceedings are taking place or, if the application is made after the proceedings are concluded, to a county court; (aa) in the case of proceedings before a residential property tribunal, to that tribunal; (b) in the case of proceedings before a residential property tribunal, to the tribunal before which the proceedings are taking place or, if the application is made after the proceedings are concluded, to any residential property tribunal; (c) in the case of proceedings before the Upper Tribunal, to the tribunal; (d) in the case of arbitration proceedings, to the arbitral tribunal or, if the application is made after the proceedings are concluded, to a county court. (3) The court or tribunal to which the application is made may make such order on the application as it considers just and equitable in the circumstances. Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 Schedule 11, paragraph 1 (1) In this Part of this Schedule “administration charge” means an amount payable by a tenant of a dwelling as part of or in addition to the rent which is payable, directly or indirectly— (a) for or in connection with the grant of approvals under his lease, or applications for such approvals, (b) for or in connection with the provision of information or documents by or on behalf of the landlord or a person who is party to his lease otherwise than as landlord or tenant, (c) in respect of a failure by the tenant to make a payment by the due date to the landlord or a person who is party to his lease otherwise than as landlord or tenant, or (d) in connection with a breach (or alleged breach) of a covenant or condition in his lease. (2) But an amount payable by the tenant of a dwelling the rent of which is registered under Part 4 of the Rent Act 1977 (c. 42) is not an administration charge, unless the amount registered is entered as a variable amount in pursuance of section 71(4) of that Act.

9 (3) In this Part of this Schedule “variable administration charge” means an administration charge payable by a tenant which is neither— (a) specified in his lease, nor (b) calculated in accordance with a formula specified in his lease. (4) An order amending sub-paragraph (1) may be made by the appropriate national authority. Schedule 11, paragraph 2 A variable administration charge is payable only to the extent that the amount of the charge is reasonable. Schedule 11, paragraph 5 (1) An application may be made to the appropriate tribunal for a determination whether an administration charge is payable and, if it is, as to— (a) the person by whom it is payable, (b) the person to whom it is payable, (c) the amount which is payable, (d) the date at or by which it is payable, and (e) the manner in which it is payable. (2) Sub-paragraph (1) applies whether or not any payment has been made. (3) The jurisdiction conferred on the appropriate tribunal in respect of any matter by virtue of sub-paragraph (1) is in addition to any jurisdiction of a court in respect of the matter. (4) No application under sub-paragraph (1) may be made in respect of a matter which— (a) has been agreed or admitted by the tenant, (b) has been, or is to be, referred to arbitration pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement to which the tenant is a party, (c) has been the subject of determination by a court, or (d) has been the subject of determination by an arbitral tribunal pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement. (5) But the tenant is not to be taken to have agreed or admitted any matter by reason only of having made any payment. (6) An agreement by the tenant of a dwelling (other than a post-dispute arbitration agreement) is void in so far as it purports to provide for a determination— (a) in a particular manner, or

10 (b) on particular evidence, of any question which may be the subject matter of an application under sub-paragraph (1).

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

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

  • None of the cases provided show a successful claimant.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The tribunal lacks jurisdiction over certain types of claims, such as disputes about damp proofing works and repairs.
  • Claims challenging the reasonableness of service charges are often dismissed.
  • Claims regarding the payment of service charges and insurance costs are frequently dismissed.
  • Claims involving the payment of administration charges for legal costs are typically unsuccessful.
  • Claims seeking determinations on fixed service charges are usually dismissed.
  • Claims concerning matters already decided by a court are generally unsuccessful.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The tribunal ruled it had no jurisdiction to decide on the reasonableness of and liability to pay sums related to damp proofing works and repairs to an intercom system.

Who was involved?

The decision involved a tenant and a landlord.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided that it lacked jurisdiction because the sums in question were not considered service charges under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, specifically Section 27A, was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was that the sums in question were not considered service charges under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

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

The decision was against the person who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should consult the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to understand what constitutes a service charge.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence and documents submitted by the parties were reviewed, but they did not change the tribunal's lack of jurisdiction.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).

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

It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving legal disputes.

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.