VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Sets New Monthly Pitch Fee for Mobile Home

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on a new monthly pitch fee for a mobile home based on the Retail Price Index increase, following the requirements of the Mobile Homes Act 1983, as amended.

⚖️ Legal holding

A site owner may increase the pitch fee annually based on the Retail Price Index increase, unless unreasonable.

Topics

tenancy agreementsmobile home feesRetail Price Index

Provisions

Mobile Homes Act 1983, as amendedRetail Price Index

📖 Technical summary

The tribunal set a new monthly pitch fee based on the Retail Price Index increase.

📜 Headnote Official document

The tribunal determined a new monthly pitch fee for a mobile home based on the Retail Price Index increase, as required by the Mobile Homes Act 1983, as amended.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : CAM/12UE/PHI/2022/0013 P:PAPERREMOTE Property : 40 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] Respondent : [redacted] : Determination of the pitch fee – paragraph 18 of Schedule 1 Mobile Homes Act 1983, as amended (“the Act”) Tribunal Member : [NAME] of Decision : 23 June 2022 DECISION

Decision of the tribunal The tribunal determines that the new pitch fee from 1st January 2022 for the pitch known as 40 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] is £116.02 per month Introduction and background 1. This has been a remote/hearing on the papers which has been consented to/ not objected to by the parties. The form of remote hearing was P:PAPERREMOTE. A face to face hearing was not held because no one requested the same nor was it practicable and all the issues could be determined on the papers. The documents that I was

2 referred to are in a bundle of 45 pages, the contents of which I have recorded. The order made is described at the end of the reasons.

2. The applicant is the site owner and the Respondent is the occupier of the Park Home address. They have not agreed the new pitch fee effective from 1st January 2022. Consequently, the site owner must apply to the Tribunal in order to obtain an increase. There does not appear to be any dispute regarding the effective date of the increase which is contained in the agreement dated 26 February 2004 made between [COMPANY] and [NAME] [NAME] [APPELLANT] and [APPELLANT].

3. On 18 November 2021 the Applicant, served a notice proposing a new monthly pitch fee of £116.02 based on the current pitch fee of £109.74, increased by the change in the Retail Price Index over the twelve months from October 2020.

4. The Applicant applied to the Tribunal on 9 March 2022 for determinations that a change in the pitch fee is reasonable and the amount of a new pitch fee.

5. Directions were issued on 27 April 2022 stating that the Tribunal would deal with the application on the papers only unless any party requested a hearing by 25 May 2022. No such request was received. The Law 6. The site owner can only increase the pitch fee annually with the agreement of the occupier or, in the absence of an agreement, by a determination of a new pitch fee by the Tribunal.

7. The site owner must give written notice accompanied by a prescribed Pitch Fee Review Form. The Tribunal notes that the correct form and time limits have been complied with in this case.

8. Paragraph 18 (1) states that When determining the amount of the new pitch fee particular regard shall be had to— (a) any sums expended by the owner since the last review date on improvements— (i) which are for the benefit of the occupiers of mobile homes on the protected site;

3 (ii) which were the subject of consultation in accordance with paragraph 22(e) and (f) below; and (iii) to which a majority of the occupiers have not disagreed in writing or which, in the case of such disagreement, the court, on the application of the owner, has ordered should be taken into account when determining the amount of the new pitch fee; Further by S20 (1) There is a presumption that the pitch fee shall increase or decrease by a percentage which is no more than any percentage increase or decrease in the retail prices index since the last review date, unless this would be unreasonable having regard to paragraph 18(1) above.

Site Inspection

9. 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. The Evidence 10. The applicant provided a bundle of documents containing a copy of the application, the Directions, the original agreement, the pitch fee review letter, Pitch Fee Review Form and an extract from the Office for National Statistics Retail Price Index (RPI) for the relevant period and a witness statement that the Respondent had not agreed to the new pitch fee.

11. The original agreement complies with the terms imposed by the Act as amended.

12. The Respondent stated that there are 93 homes within the site. There had been no improvements to the site since October 2018. The site was flooded in 2020; the site had not been disinfected following the flood.

Determination 13. As the Tribunal has received no evidence from the Respondent which would reduce the pitch fee and the increase is based on the change in the RPI over the relevant twelve months it determines that the pitch fee should increase from the review date of 1st January 2022 to £116.02 per month in accordance with the Notice dated 18 November 2021.

4 14. If the Respondent has continued to pay the original pitch fee since the review date, he must pay the difference to the Applicant. [APPELLANT] 23 June 2022

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.

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 10 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

  • The site owner's proposed pitch fee increase was based on the Retail Price Index, which is presumed to be reasonable.
  • The site owner followed the correct procedures for proposing a new pitch fee, including using the prescribed form and time limits.
  • The original agreement between the parties complied with the relevant legal act.
  • The respondent did not provide any evidence to justify reducing the pitch fee.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The respondent's claim that there had been no improvements to the site since October 2018 was not accepted as a reason to prevent the fee increase.
  • The respondent's claim that the site had not been disinfected after a 2020 flood was not accepted as a reason to prevent the fee increase.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

It set a new monthly pitch fee for a mobile home based on the Retail Price Index increase.

Who was involved?

The site owner and the occupier of the mobile home were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the Retail Price Index increase, as required by the Mobile Homes Act 1983, as amended.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Mobile Homes Act 1983, as amended, and the Retail Price Index were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the calculation of the pitch fee increase based on the Retail Price Index.

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

The decision was for the site owner who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should ensure their calculations comply with the Mobile Homes Act 1983, as amended.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence included the original agreement, the pitch fee review letter, and the Retail Price Index data.

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.