Tenant Not Liable for Unreasonable Administration Charges
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided that a tenant is not required to pay unreasonable administration charges. The landlord was ordered to refund the tenant's application fee.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is not liable to pay administration charges if they are deemed unreasonable.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal ruled that the administration charges are not payable and ordered the Respondent to reimburse the Applicant's application fee.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) ruled that the tenant is not liable to pay administration charges deemed unreasonable, ordering the landlord to reimburse the tenant's application fee within 28 days.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
Case Reference
:
CHI/24UJ/LAC/2018/0015
Property
:
8 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Applicant: [redacted]
:
Respondent: [redacted]
:
[COUNSEL] [COMPANY] of Application
:
Liability to pay Administration Charges
Tribunal Member(s)
:
Judge Tildesley OBE
Date of Directions
:
8 January 2019
Supplemental Decision
2
Background
1. The Applicant seeks a determination under Schedule 11 to the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 (the 2002 Act) as to whether administration charges are payable.
2. On 14 December 2018 the Tribunal determined the following
1. The Applicant is not liable to pay the administration charge of £375.
2. Subject to any representations made by the Respondent by 4 January 2019:
▪ The Tribunal is minded to make orders under section 20C and paragraph 5a schedule 11 of the 2002 Act preventing the Respondent from recovering its costs in connection with these proceedings from the Applicant
▪ The Tribunal is minded to order the Respondent to reimburse the Applicant with £100 application fee within 28 days.
3. If no representations are made the Orders in respect of Costs and fees will be confirmed without further notice.
Determination
3. No representations have been made. The Tribunal considers it just and equitable in view of the outcome of the case to make orders under section 20C of the 1985 Act and paragraph 5a schedule 11 of the 2002 Act preventing the Respondent from recovering its costs in connection with these proceedings from the Applicant
4. The Tribunal orders the Respondent to reimburse the applicant with £100 application fee within 28 days.
3
RIGHTS OF APPEAL
1. A person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) must seek permission to do so by making written application to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case.
2. The application must arrive at the Tribunal within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision.
3. If the person wishing to appeal does not comply with the 28 day time limit, the person shall include with the application for permission to appeal a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28 day time limit; the Tribunal will then decide whether to extend time or not to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed.
4. The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party making the application is seeking
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 11 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Fire Safety Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation from Consultation Requirements
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Energy Procurement Agreements
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rules on Cost Recovery Under Building Safety Regulation…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Secures Section 20C Order Limiting Landlord Costs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Permission to Skip Consultation for Urgent Drain Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Excess Works Costs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord awarded costs after RTM claim - First-tier Tribunal Judgment
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Varies Leases for Fair Service Charge Contribution
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 tenant was not required to pay the administration charge of £375.
- The landlord was prevented from recovering its legal costs from the tenant.
- The landlord was ordered to reimburse the tenant for the £100 application fee.
- The Tribunal considered it fair to make cost orders due to the case's outcome.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord failed to make any representations regarding the proposed cost orders.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tenant is not liable to pay unreasonable administration charges.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the administration charges were unreasonable and therefore not payable.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that the charges were unreasonable was crucial.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone facing unreasonable administration charges may not be required to pay them.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence presented showed the charges were unreasonable.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, the decision can be appealed 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.
