VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Landlords Cannot Pass Service Charge Costs to Tenants

Case No.

📌 In brief

In a recent case, the First-tier Tribunal ruled that landlords cannot pass on costs related to service charge proceedings to tenants. This decision protects tenants from bearing unfair financial burdens.

⚖️ Legal holding

Tenants are entitled to prevent landlords from passing on costs incurred in connection with service charge determinations.

Topics

service chargescosts recovery

Provisions

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20CLandlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.27A

📖 Technical summary

The tribunal ruled that the landlord cannot pass on costs related to service charge proceedings to tenants.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal ruled that the landlord cannot pass on costs incurred in connection with service charge proceedings to tenants, emphasising the importance of fair cost distribution between landlords and tenants.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00BG/LSC/2021/0453 Property : Flats 1-7 and 9, 40 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicants : [redacted] Representative : Mr [COUNSEL] (flat 4) and Mr [COUNSEL] (Flat 1) Respondent : [redacted] : [RESPONDENT] of [NAME] : For the determination of an [NAME] under Section 20C of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal members : Judge Pittaway Ms S Phillips MRICS Mr J Naylor MRICS MIRPM Date of decision : 19 July 2022

DECISION

2 Description of hearing This has been a remote hearing on the papers which has not objected to by the parties. The form of remote hearing was P:PAPERREMOTE. A face-to-face hearing was not held because it was not practicable and all issues could be determined on paper

Decisions of the tribunal The tribunal makes an order under section 20C of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 so that the respondent may not pass any of its costs incurred in connection with the tribunal’s determination of the liability to pay service charges under section 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 dated 27 June 2022 made under the same case reference (the ‘s27A Determination’) to the applicants

[NAME] under s.20C 1. Contemporaneously with their [NAME] for a determination under s27A Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 the applicants made an [NAME] under s20C of the 1985 Act that the costs in connection with the proceedings should not be included in any service charge payable by the applicants.

2. At the hearing it was agreed that this [NAME] should follow the s27A Determination.

3. The tribunal directed in the s27A Determination that if the respondent wished to challenge the s.20 [NAME] it should provide the tribunal and the applicants with full details of the costs being sought by 14 July 2022.

4. As at 18 July 2022 the tribunal had received nothing from the respondent. Reasons for the tribunal’s decision 5. The respondent has not challenged the s.20C [NAME] by the applicants as provided for in the s27A Determination.

6. Taking into account the s27A Determination and the absence of challenge by the respondent of the S20C [NAME] the tribunal determines that it is just and equitable in the circumstances for an order to be made under s20C of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 so that the respondent may not pass any of its costs incurred in connection with the proceedings relating to the s27A Determination before the tribunal through the service charge.

3

Name: Judge Pittaway Date: 19 July 2022

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 a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), then a written [NAME] for permission must be made to the First- tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with the case. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office within 28 days after the tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the [NAME]. If the [NAME] is not made within the 28-day time limit, such [NAME] 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 [NAME] for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The [NAME] 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 [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking. If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further [NAME] for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).

📊 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

  • Landlords can adjust rent based on property condition and local market conditions.
  • Landlords may be exempted from consultation requirements if the works are essential and do not harm tenants.
  • Tenants are entitled to pay reasonable costs for obtaining a new lease.
  • Landlords can obtain dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent repairs.
  • Rent for an assured periodic tenancy should match the open market value of the property.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • A tenant cannot apply to the tribunal to review excessive rent more than six months after the start of an assured shorthold tenancy.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The decision ruled that the landlord cannot pass on costs incurred in connection with service charge proceedings to tenants.

Who was involved?

The case involved tenants and a landlord.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided that it was just and equitable to prevent the landlord from passing on these costs, considering the fairness towards tenants.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 sections 20C and 27A were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument centered around the fairness of cost distribution between landlords and tenants.

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

The decision was for the tenants.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation can rely on this decision to protect themselves from unfair cost imposition by landlords.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence and documents related to the costs incurred by the landlord in connection with the service charge proceedings.

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 service charges and costs recovery.

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.