VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tenant Entitled to Reasonable Service Charges Determination

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal ruled that the service charges were reasonable and ordered a full refund to the tenant. This decision was based on the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a determination of the reasonableness of service charges under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

Topics

service chargesreasonableness of costs

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.18

The term 'service charge' refers to an amount paid by a tenant as part of or in addition to rent, which can cover services, repairs, maintenance, improvements, insurance, or the landlord's management costs. It can also vary based on the costs incurred by the landlord.

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.19

When determining the reasonableness of a service charge, only the costs that are reasonably incurred should be considered. Additionally, the quality of services or works provided must be of a reasonable standard. If the service charge is paid before the costs are incurred, the amount must be reasonable, and adjustments will be made once the actual costs are known.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.

📖 Technical summary

The tribunal ruled that the service charges were reasonable and ordered a full refund to the tenant.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined that the service charges were reasonable and ordered a full refund to the tenant under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2013

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00AZ/LSC/2021/0095 [PHONEREMOTE]

Property : 547 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : In person Respondent : [redacted] : [COUNSEL] of Application : For the determination of the liability to pay and reasonableness of service charges (s.27A Landlord and Tenant Act 1985) Tribunal Members : Judge Professor Robert Abbey Date and venue of Hearing : Telephone Hearing on 1 February 2022 Date of Decision : 1 February 2022

DECISION

Decisions of the tribunal

(1) The tribunal determines that the dispute has been settled and completed by the respondent refunding the full amount of the service

2

charges claimed by the applicant in the sum of £12.12 as detailed below. The applications 1. The applicant seeks a determination pursuant to s.27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the 1985 Act”) as to the amount of service charge payable by the respondent in respect of service charges payable for services provided for [ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], Catford London SE6 4S, (the property) and the liability to pay such service charge.

2. The application to the Tribunal was concerned with service charges arising in service charge years 2018 2019 amounting to £12.12 in total.

3. The relevant legal provisions are set out in the Appendix to this decision. Additionally, rights of appeal are set out below in an annex to this decision The hearing 4. From the start of the application the applicant was self-represented and the respondent was represented by [RESPONDENT]. The hearing was a case management hearing on the telephone where Ms [APPELLANT] attended but the applicant failed to attend. Pursuant to The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013 2013 No. 1169 (L. 8) and Rule 34 that deals with hearings in a party’s absence the Tribunal noted that this Rule states that: - “34. If a party fails to attend a hearing the Tribunal may proceed with the hearing if the Tribunal— (a) is satisfied that the party has been notified of the hearing or that reasonable steps have been taken to notify the party of the hearing; and (b) considers that it is in the interests of justice to proceed with the hearing.” 5. In view of the very small sum in dispute the Tribunal decided that it would proceed in the absence of the applicant as it was in the interests of Justice to proceed in this way so as to avoid the disproportionate use of Tribunal time on such a small disputed amount.

3

6. The tribunal did not inspect the property as it considered the documentation and information before it in the trial bundle enabled the tribunal to proceed with this determination and also because of the restrictions and regulations arising out of the Covid-19 pandemic.

7. The Tribunal had before it all the application papers and correspondence and other documentation submitted by the parties during the course of this application that was commenced in March of 2021. Decision 8. The Tribunal is required to consider whether the services were reasonably incurred and were they of a reasonable standard. To do this the Tribunal considered in detail the documentation set out above.

9. The details of the charges are as follows- 547 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]. Breakdown of the actual cost of repairs 1 April 2018 to 31 March 2019

General Building & Estate Repairs Repair No Date Logged Description Block Cost Unit Cost 4642622 26/04/2018 Trace and remedy leak affecting flat 547 £72.25 £0.26 4683303 17/09/2018 Paint walls and ceiling of block following fire £847.6 £3.07 4691429 02/10/2018 Trace and remedy leak onto ground floor car park opposite precinct entrance £72.25 £0.26 4674918 17/08/2018 Paint ceilings after fire damage Holbeach west £352.08 £1.28 4724221 14/01/2019 FRA flat 547 renew door £782.95 £2.84

TOTAL £2127.13 £7.71

4

The total block cost is £2127.13 and this was divided by 276 properties to give a charge of £7.71.

Technical Servicing & Repairs Repair No. Date Logged Description Block Cost Unit Cost 4579503 26/09/2017 Block repair renew fire damaged cables £916.29 £3.32 4559674 20/07/2017 Block fire alarm and emergency lighting £146.90 £0.53 4636764 09/04/2018 Block fire alarm and emergency lighting service - period 1 2018 £153.15 £0.55

TOTAL £1,216.34 £4.41

10. The total block cost is £1,216.34 and this was divided by 276 properties to give a charge of £4.41.

11. So, in total the sum due to the applicant amounted to just £12.12. At the hearing the respondent confirmed that this sum had been credited back to the applicant’s service charge account and they had sent her a form to enable her to seek the full repayment of this sum.

Accordingly, a recredit had happened and a full refund offered. In these circumstances the Tribunal determined that these charges were reasonable and that the matter was therefore concluded.

12. Finally, the Tribunal was informed that the applicant ceased to be a tenant of the respondent in September 2019. Name: Judge Professor Robert Abbey Date: 01 February 2022

5

Appendix of relevant legislation and rules

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 [NAME], 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,

6

(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) 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.

7

ANNEX - RIGHTS OF APPEAL

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

2. The application for permission to appeal must arrive at the [NAME] 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 8 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 tribunal determined the dispute was settled because the respondent refunded the full amount of service charges claimed.
  • The tribunal decided to proceed with the hearing even though the applicant was absent.
  • The tribunal considered it in the interests of justice to proceed with the hearing due to the small sum in dispute.
  • The tribunal did not inspect the property because the documentation allowed it to proceed.
  • The respondent confirmed that the disputed sum had been credited back to the applicant's service charge account.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

It decided that the service charges were reasonable and ordered a full refund to the tenant.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the documentation and information provided, considering the costs were reasonable.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 sections 18, 19, and 27A were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the reasonableness of the service charges.

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 should ensure their service charges are reasonable and challenge unreasonable charges.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The breakdown of the actual cost of repairs and the documentation provided mattered.

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 involving service charges.

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.