VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tenant Entitled to Receive Owing Service Charges

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) decided that a tenant is entitled to receive service charges owed for the years 2014-2017, including administration charges and tribunal fees, following a dispute resolution hearing.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to receive the service charges owed following a tribunal decision.

Topics

service chargestenancy disputes

Provisions

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (as amended)Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal ruled that the respondent must pay the service charges owed to the claimant.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) ruled that a tenant is entitled to receive service charges owed for the years 2014-2017, including administration charges and tribunal fees, following a dispute resolution hearing.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00BK/LSC/2018/0330 Property : [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : Applicant in Person Respondent : [redacted] : Mr [COUNSEL] [NAME] (Counsel). Type of Application : For the determination of the reasonableness of and the liability to pay a service charge Tribunal Members : Judge Abebrese, [NAME] and venue of Hearing : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] 17 December 2018 Date of Decision : 14 June 2019

SUPPLEMENTARY DECISION

The background 1. The Tribunal in a decision dated 28 February 2019 following a hearing of the substantive issues in December 2018 made orders which are described in paragraphs 52-73 of the decision.

2. The Tribunal issued further directions following a request from the applicant for further clarification from the Tribunal regarding the specific amounts which is owned to him following the decision of the Tribunal. The Tribunal provided directions on 9 April 2019 to both parties. The applicant complied fully with the directions and provided a breakdown of the amounts which in his view were owned to him and they were forwarded to the respondent and to the Tribunal.

3. The applicant initially wrote to the respondent a letter dated 7 March 2019 with detailed calculations of the sums owing in accordance with the decision of the Tribunal. The applicant following the directions wrote to the Tribunal again restating the amounts owing to him.

4. The position of the applicant is that service charges for the years 2014-2015, 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 which were disputed by the respondent at the hearing are now owing following the decision of the Tribunal.

5. The applicant is also of the view that administration charges are not payable and Tribunal fees of £300 are to be refunded to him. The total amount owing according to the applicant is the total sum of £7,345.70 6. The Tribunal finds that the respondent is liable for the sums claimed by the applicant and that the applicant has appropriately broken down for the benefit of the respondent the exact amounts that are owned following the decision of the Tribunal.

7. The applicant and the respondent are bound by the full terms of the decision of the Tribunal and the respondent is bound to pay the service charges owing.

8. The Tribunal finds that the respondent has also not complied with any of the terms of the directions issued by the Tribunal and has also failed to respond to any of the letters of the applicant sent to him regarding the service charges owing. The Tribunal therefore in the circumstances makes the following decisions set out in the paragraph below. The tribunal’s decision 9. The Tribunal makes the following orders : (i) 2014-2015 the sum of £2,362.20 (ii) 2015-2016 the sum of £1,808.77

(iii) 2016-2017 the sum of £2,208.57 (iv) Administration Charges of £887.35 are not payable by the applicant (v) Tribunal fees of £300 to be refunded to the applicant 10. The total amount to be paid by the respondent is £7,345.70.

Name:

Date:

14 June 2019 Judge Abebrese

Appendix of relevant legislation

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 superior landlord, 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, (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. Section 20 (1) Where this section applies to any qualifying works or qualifying long term agreement, the relevant contributions of tenants are limited in accordance with subsection (6) or (7) (or both) unless the consultation requirements have been either— (a) complied with in relation to the works or agreement, or (b) dispensed with in relation to the works or agreement by (or on appeal from) the appropriate tribunal . (2) In this section “relevant contribution”, in relation to a tenant and any works or agreement, is the amount which he may be required under the terms of his lease to contribute (by the payment of service charges) to relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works or under the agreement. (3) This section applies to qualifying works if relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works exceed an appropriate amount. (4) The Secretary of State may by regulations provide that this section applies to a qualifying long term agreement— (a) if relevant costs incurred under the agreement exceed an appropriate amount, or (b) if relevant costs incurred under the agreement during a period prescribed by the regulations exceed an appropriate amount.

(5) An appropriate amount is an amount set by regulations made by the Secretary of State; and the regulations may make provision for either or both of the following to be an appropriate amount— (a) an amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations, and (b) an amount which results in the relevant contribution of any one or more tenants being an amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations. (6) Where an appropriate amount is set by virtue of paragraph (a) of subsection (5), the amount of the relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works or under the agreement which may be taken into account in determining the relevant contributions of tenants is limited to the appropriate amount. (7) Where an appropriate amount is set by virtue of paragraph (b) of that subsection, the amount of the relevant contribution of the tenant, or each of the tenants, whose relevant contribution would otherwise exceed the amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations is limited to the amount so prescribed or determined.] Section 20B (1) If any of the relevant costs taken into account in determining the amount of any service charge were incurred more than 18 months before a demand for payment of the service charge is served on the tenant, then (subject to subsection (2)), the tenant shall not be liable to pay so much of the service charge as reflects the costs so incurred. (2) Subsection (1) shall not apply if, within the period of 18 months beginning with the date when the relevant costs in question were incurred, the tenant was notified in writing that those costs had been incurred and that he would subsequently be required under the terms of his lease to contribute to them by the payment of a service charge. Section 20C (1) A tenant may make an application for an order that all or any of the costs incurred, or to be incurred, by the landlord in connection with proceedings before a court, residential property tribunal or the Upper Tribunal, or in connection with arbitration proceedings, are not to be regarded as relevant costs to be taken into account in determining the amount of any service charge payable by the tenant or any other person or persons specified in the application. (2) The application shall be made— (a) in the case of court proceedings, to the court before which the proceedings are taking place or, if the application is made after the proceedings are concluded, to a county court;

(aa) in the case of proceedings before a residential property tribunal, to that tribunal; (b) in the case of proceedings before a residential property tribunal, to the tribunal before which the proceedings are taking place or, if the application is made after the proceedings are concluded, to any residential property tribunal; (c) in the case of proceedings before the Upper Tribunal, to the tribunal; (d) in the case of arbitration proceedings, to the arbitral tribunal or, if the application is made after the proceedings are concluded, to a county court. (3) The court or tribunal to which the application is made may make such order on the application as it considers just and equitable in the circumstances. Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 Schedule 11, paragraph 1 (1) In this Part of this Schedule “administration charge” means an amount payable by a tenant of a dwelling as part of or in addition to the rent which is payable, directly or indirectly— (a) for or in connection with the grant of approvals under his lease, or applications for such approvals, (b) for or in connection with the provision of information or documents by or on behalf of the landlord or a person who is party to his lease otherwise than as [NAME], (c) in respect of a failure by the tenant to make a payment by the due date to the landlord or a person who is party to his lease otherwise than as [NAME], or (d) in connection with a breach (or alleged breach) of a covenant or condition in his lease. (2) But an amount payable by the tenant of a dwelling the rent of which is registered under Part 4 of the Rent Act 1977 (c. 42) is not an administration charge, unless the amount registered is entered as a variable amount in pursuance of section 71(4) of that Act. (3) In this Part of this Schedule “variable administration charge” means an administration charge payable by a tenant which is neither— (a) specified in his lease, nor (b) calculated in accordance with a formula specified in his lease. (4) An order amending sub-paragraph (1) may be made by the appropriate national authority. Schedule 11, paragraph 2

A variable administration charge is payable only to the extent that the amount of the charge is reasonable. Schedule 11, paragraph 5 (1) An application may be made to the appropriate tribunal for a determination whether an administration charge is payable and, if it is, as to— (a) the person by whom it is payable, (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) Sub-paragraph (1) applies whether or not any payment has been made. (3) The jurisdiction conferred on the appropriate tribunal in respect of any matter by virtue of sub-paragraph (1) is in addition to any jurisdiction of a court in respect of the matter. (4) No application under sub-paragraph (1) 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. (6) An agreement by the tenant of a dwelling (other than a post-dispute arbitration agreement) is void in so far as it purports to provide for a determination— (a) in a particular manner, or (b) on particular evidence, of any question which may be the subject matter of an application under sub-paragraph (1). Orders for costs, reimbursement of fees and interest on costs 13.—(1) The Tribunal may make an order in respect of costs only— (a) under section 29(4) of the 2007 Act (wasted costs) and the costs incurred in applying for such costs; (b) if a person has acted unreasonably in bringing, defending or conducting proceedings in— (i) an agricultural land and drainage case, (ii) a residential property case, or (iii) a leasehold case; or (c) in a land registration case. (2) The Tribunal may make an order requiring a party to reimburse to any other party the whole or part of the amount of any fee paid by the other party which has not been remitted by the Lord Chancellor. (3) The Tribunal may make an order under this rule on an application or on its own

initiative. (4) A person making an application for an order for costs— (a) must, unless the application is made orally at a hearing, send or deliver an application to the Tribunal and to the person against whom the order is sought to be made.

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 9 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

  • Service charges are considered reasonable if they are incurred for legitimate purposes.
  • Service charges must be of a reasonable standard and not exaggerated.
  • Tenants have the right to challenge the reasonableness of service charges under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
  • Proper documentation and justification of service charges under the lease agreement are required for their recovery.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • Tribunals may strike out cases where specific service charges cannot be considered under statutory provisions.
  • Cases may be dismissed if service charges are claimed without clear evidence of their reasonableness and legitimacy.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The tenant is entitled to receive service charges owed for the years 2014-2017, including administration charges and tribunal fees.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved in a dispute over service charges.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided in favour of the tenant because the landlord had not complied with the terms of the decision and had failed to respond to letters regarding the service charges owed.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was that the landlord had not complied with the terms of the decision and had failed to respond to letters regarding the service charges owed.

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 that they comply with the terms of the decision and respond to letters regarding the service charges owed.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Letters and detailed calculations of the sums owed were important evidence.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Decisions like this can be appealed to a higher court or tribunal.

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

It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases like this.

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.