Leaseholder Wins Right to Financial Information from Landlord
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal ruled that a leaseholder is entitled to receive detailed financial and insurance information from the landlord once the leaseholder has taken over management of the property.
⚖️ Legal holding
A leaseholder is entitled to receive financial statements and building insurance details from the landlord upon acquiring the right to manage the property.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal ordered the Respondent to provide financial and insurance information to the Claimant under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal ordered the landlord to provide the leaseholder with financial statements and building insurance details after the leaseholder acquired the right to manage the property under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00BA/LRM/2025/0028 Property : 105 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : Ms [COUNSEL] (Director) Respondent : [redacted] : [RESPONDENT] ([NAME] [COUNSEL] [NAME]) Type of [NAME] : For Order for Compliance section 107 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 Tribunal Member : Deputy Regional Judge N Carr Date of Notice : 26 November 2025
ORDER PURSUANT TO SECTION 107(2) COMMONHOLD AND LEASEHOLD REFORM ACT 2002
ORDER
1. Pursuant to section 107(1) Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 (‘CLRA’), the Tribunal Orders the Respondent to remedy it’s default in compliance with section 93 CLRA (Duty to provide information) by sending to the Applicant by 4pm on 11 December 2025 the following:
(a) (i) A copy of the buildings insurance policy or summary of cover, a copy of the current schedule and evidence of payment of the premium for the current year (ii) Brief details of the claims history for the last 3 years
2 (b) A copy of the Financial Statements for the year to December 2024 (c) Interim accounts for the period from December 2024 to 25 July 2025 (d) A list of service charges due from or held on account in respect of each flat (e) Details of any surplus monies held on account of the service charges (f) The percentages of service charges payable in respect of all the flats contained at the premises and to: (i) supply the Company to the address stated above with a copy of any document containing the said information in readily intelligible form, and (ii) permit any person authorised to act on behalf of the Company at any reasonable time to inspect any document in your possession.
2. For the avoidance of doubt, the date of acquisition of the right to manage was 25 July 2025, and references to previous or current years in paragraph 1. above are all by reference to the service charge year in which that date fell.
3. By section 107(3) CLRA this Order is enforceable in the County Court as an order of that court.
4. Unless the Respondent complies with paragraph 1 above, the Tribunal will transfer the matter to the County Court at Wandsworth, for consideration of appropriate enforcement pursuant to section 107(3)(b) CLRA.
REASONS
A. This order should be read together with the order and reasons given in the connected [NAME] for a determination of accrued uncommitted service charge funds, of the same date. B. A no-fault right to manage (‘RTM’) claim notice in respect of the property 105 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] (‘the premises’), itself dated 13 March 2025, was given to [COMPANY], its representative company [COMPANY], and to [NAME] [COUNSEL] [NAME] of [COMPANY] by first-class post on 14 March 2025. C. By email dated 15 March 2025, [RESPONDENT] solicitors (on behalf of the Respondent) made a number of enquiries that were responded to on 27
3 March 2025 by the Applicant’s then-representative, [COMPANY]. No counternotice was served. D. On 30 May 2025, the Applicant gave notice to the Respondent under section 93 CLRA (‘the section 93 notice’) that it required the documents listed in that notice, in view of the acquisition of the right to manage the premises due to take place on 25 July 2025. E. Acquisition of the RTM took effect as a matter of law on 25 July 2025 (section 90 CLRA). F. By email of 5 August 2025, the Tribunal received an [NAME] from Ms [APPELLANT], a Director of the Applicant. The Respondent was given notice of the [NAME] by an email from the Tribunal dated 13 August 2025 at 12:18pm. G. By that [NAME], the Applicant sought, amongst other things, an order pursuant to section 107 CLRA, in respect of those documents/information required in the section 93 notice. [NAME]. On 8 September 2025, the Tribunal gave Directions for both parties in relation to the [NAME], by a single set of directions covering both the section 93 [NAME] and an associated [NAME] under section 94(3) for a determination of the sum of accrued uncommitted service charges payable by the Respondent to the Applicant. Those Directions should be read together with this Order.
I. By paragraph (8) of those Directions, the Tribunal identified the documents sought by the Applicant by its section 93 Notice given to the Respondent on 30 May 2025, to which the Applicant received no response. J. By direction 2 of those Directions, the Tribunal required the Respondent to give disclosure to the Applicant of documents including those set out by the Applicant identified in paragraph (8) therein. K. The Respondent failed to comply. L. By notice of intention to make an order pursuant to section 107(2) (‘Notice of Intention’), for the reasons set out in that order, the Tribunal made an unless order in which it directed the Respondent to comply with the direction given on 8 September within 14 days, failing which an order under section 107(1) and (3) would be made in respect of the section 93 [NAME]. M. The Respondent replied purporting to be confused. By order dated 6 November 2025, the Tribunal extended time for compliance with the Notice of Intention to Thursday 13 November 2025. N. The Respondent has failed to comply.
4 O. The Tribunal therefore makes the order as identified in its Notice of Intention, giving effect to the unless order.
Name: Judge N Carr Date: 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 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:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Carpet Replacement
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Premium for Collective Enfranchisement
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rules in favour of RTM Company at Fourways House
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Statutory Lease Extension Granted Where Landlord Cannot Be Found
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Breaches Lease by Failing to Provide Proof of Insurance
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Fire Alarm Upgrade Dispensation Without Formal Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Extends Deadline for Building Remediation Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Extends Property Manager’s Appointment Until 2027
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord's Claim for Fees Rejected in Tenancy Dispute
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Appropriate Sum for Leasehold Enfranchisemen…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Upholds Most Service Charges as Reasonable
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 right to manage was acquired on July 25, 2025, making the landlord responsible for providing information from that date.
- The applicant had previously given notice to the respondent requesting the documents.
- The Tribunal had issued directions requiring the respondent to disclose the requested documents.
- The respondent failed to comply with the Tribunal's directions.
- The Tribunal had issued an "unless order" giving the respondent a final chance to comply, which was also ignored.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The respondent claimed to be confused about the Tribunal's order, but this was not accepted as a valid reason for non-compliance.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
It decided that the landlord must provide the leaseholder with financial statements and building insurance details.
Who was involved?
The case involved a leaseholder and a landlord.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the leaseholder because the landlord had not complied with the duty to provide information under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, specifically sections 93 and 107, were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the leaseholder's right to receive financial and insurance information after acquiring the right to manage the property.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation can seek the same information from their landlord after acquiring the right to manage the property.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence included the leaseholder's notice requesting the information and the landlord's failure to respond.
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 get advice from a qualified solicitor for cases like this.
