VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Residents' Association Granted Qualifying Status Under Mobile Homes Act 1983

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal recognised a residents' association under the Mobile Homes Act 1983, granting them the right to consult on matters affecting the mobile home park.

⚖️ Legal holding

A residents' association qualifies for recognition if it meets the criteria set out in Paragraph 28(1) of the Mobile Homes Act 1983.

Topics

tenancyqualifying residents' associationMobile Homes Act 1983

Provisions

Mobile Homes Act 1983 s.28(1)

📖 Technical summary

The First-tier Tribunal granted recognition to a residents' association under the Mobile Homes Act 1983.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal granted recognition to a residents' association under the Mobile Homes Act 1983 after confirming they met the necessary criteria outlined in Paragraph 28(1) of the Act.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

Page 1 of 4

Case Reference

:

BIR/31UB/PHK/2018/0003

Property : [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Applicant: [redacted] : [COUNSEL]

Respondent: [redacted] : An Application under paragraph 28 (1) (h) of Chapter 2 of Schedule 1 to the Mobile Homes Act 1983

Tribunal Member : [NAME]

Date of Decision : 12 November 2018

__________________________________________________________

DECISION _____________________________________________________

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2018 FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Page 2 of 4

BACKGROUND

1. On 16 September 2018, the Applicant, [APPELLANT], applied for recognition by the Tribunal as a qualifying residents’ [APPELLANT]. Such recognition confers upon the residents’ [APPELLANT] the consultation rights provided to such associations by Paragraph 22 (f) of the implied terms set out at Chapter 2 of Schedule 1 to the Mobile Homes Act 1983 (as amended).

2. By way of Directions issued on 12 October 2018, the Respondent was invited to advise the Tribunal by 30 October 2018 if the application was opposed and on what grounds.

3. No response was received. The Tribunal therefore proceeded to make its determination on the basis that the Applicant did not object to the application.

The Law

4. Paragraph 28 (1) of the Mobile Homes Act 1983 sets out the requirements to be met by an [APPELLANT].

28(1) A residents’ [APPELLANT] is a qualifying [APPELLANT] in relation to a protected [NAME] if –

(a) it is an [APPELLANT] representing the occupiers of mobile homes on that [NAME];

(b) at least 50% of the occupiers of the mobile homes on that [NAME] are members of the [APPELLANT];

(c) it is independent from the owner, who together with any agent or employee of his is excluded from membership;

(d) subject to paragraph (c) above, membership is open to all occupiers who own a mobile home on that [NAME];

(e) it maintains a list of members which is open to public inspection together with the rules and constitution of the residents’ [APPELLANT];

(f) it has a [NAME], secretary and [NAME] who are elected by and from among the members;

(g) with the exception of administrative decisions taken by the [NAME], secretary and [NAME] acting in their official capacities, decisions are taken by voting and

Page 3 of 4

(h) the owner has acknowledged in writing to the secretary that the [APPELLANT] is a qualifying residents’ [APPELLANT] or, in default if this, the Tribunal has so ordered.

Determination

5. Following an initial review of the application, the Tribunal requested additional information in order to ascertain if the provisions of Paragraph 28 (1) had been met.

6. Following a further review of the information supplied, and in the absence of an objection by the [NAME], the Tribunal considers that the Applicant has met the requirements of Paragraph 28 (1) of the Mobile Homes Act 1983 and accordingly finds that [APPELLANT] should be afforded qualifying residents’ [APPELLANT] status under the Mobile Homes Act 1983.

Appeal

7. Any appeal against this decision must be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber). Prior to making such an appeal an aggrieved party must apply in writing to the First-tier Tribunal for permission to appeal within 28 days of the date specified below stating the grounds on which that party intends to rely in the appeal. Further information is contained within Part 6 of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013 (S.I. 2013 No. 1169).

[NAME] 4 of 4

First tier Tribunal ([NAME]) Residential Property CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION An application from [APPELLANT]’ [APPELLANT] for a Certificate of Recognition under the provisions of Section 29 of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 has been considered by: [APPELLANT] who is a person appointed under the Act to the panel of persons to act as members of the First Tier Tribunal [NAME] for the Midlands area

This is to certify that [APPELLANT] is a recognised Tenants’ [APPELLANT] for the purpose of the aforementioned section. The Certificate will be valid for a period of four years commencing 12 November 2018 [NAME]

12 November 2018

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • The residents' association applied for recognition as a qualifying association, which confers consultation rights.
  • The respondent did not oppose the application, so the Tribunal proceeded without objection.
  • The Tribunal found that the applicant met the requirements for a qualifying residents' association.
  • The residents' association was granted qualifying status under the Mobile Homes Act 1983.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

It decided to grant recognition to a residents' association under the Mobile Homes Act 1983.

Who was involved?

A residents' association and the site owner were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the association meeting the criteria set out in the Mobile Homes Act 1983.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Mobile Homes Act 1983, specifically Paragraph 28(1).

What was the argument that mattered most?

The association's compliance with the criteria for recognition under the Mobile Homes Act 1983.

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

The decision was in favour of the residents' association.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation could also seek recognition as a qualifying residents' association.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence showing the association met the criteria for recognition was likely submitted.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, an appeal can be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).

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

It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.

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.
Residents' Association Recognised Under Mobile Homes Act | VadeLab