Tenant Not Required to Pay Unreasonable Legal Costs Following Notice of Forfeiture

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference :

LON/00AH/LLC/2024/0601

Property : 31 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [NAME] Respondents : [redacted] : KDLaw Type of [NAME] : [NAME] under Sch. 11, para 5A of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 Tribunal member : Judge Tagliavini Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 9 December 2025

DECISION

2 Decisions of the tribunal (1) The tribunal finds the legal costs sought by the respondent in the sum of

£8,396.00 are not payable by the applicant for the reasons set out

below. (ii) The tribunal makes an order under s.20C of the Landlord and Tenant

Act 2985 so that none of the respondent’s costs of or arising from this

[NAME] can be added to the service charges. (iii) The tribunal makes an order under Sch. 11, para 5A so that none of the

respondent’s costs of or arising from this [NAME] can be sought from

the applicant. _____________________________________________________ The [NAME] 1. The applicant seeks a determination under Para 5 Schedule 11 to the

Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 (“the 2002 Act”) as to

whether administration charges in the sum of £8,396.00 arising in

respect of proceedings and the service of a Notice of Forfeiture in the

sum of are payable to the respondent. 2. The applicant also seeks an order for the limitation of the landlord's costs

in the proceedings under section 20C of the Landlord and Tenant Act

1985 (“the 1985 Act”) and an order to reduce or extinguish the tenant’s

liability to pay an administration charge in respect of litigation costs,

under paragraph 5A of Schedule 11 to the Commonhold and Leasehold

Reform Act 2002. 3. By an Order of [APPELLANT] dated 1 April 2025, the applicant’s

[NAME] in respect of costs arising in the County Court under

Claim No: LOQZ84Q3 are struck out. The background 2. It is useful to set out a summary chronology of the relevant facts

pertaining to this [NAME]:

12 June 2024 – County Court judgement for the [NAME] in the sum of £25, 881.29 for debt arising from arrears

of service charges and interest) and £1,287.82 for costs

(£27,169.11 total).

19 July 2024 – service by respondent of s.146 Notice of

Forfeiture seeking payment of sum of £35,359.67 inclusive of

3

judgement debt of £27, 169.11 and a further sum of £8,396.60 in

costs.

25 July 2024 – payment of £27,169.11 by applicant

extinguishing judgement debt.

2 August 2024 – the sum of £8,396.00 paid without prejudice

to his right to challenge their payability.

9 December 2024 – [NAME] (dated 9/12/2024) made to the

[NAME] pursuant to Schedule 11 of the Commonhold and

Leasehold Reform Act 2002 (‘the 2002’) seeking a determination

of the payability of the costs of £8,396.00. The hearing 5. Neither party requested an oral hearing and therefore the tribunal

determined the [NAME] using the 335 digital bundle provided by the

applicant. The tribunal’s decision and reasons 6. In reaching its decision the tribunal had regard to the parties’

representations and supporting documents contained in the digital

bundle. 7. The applicant did not seek to challenge the payment of administration

charges (legal costs) under the terms of the lease. The applicant

challenged the reasonableness of the respondent’s conduct in incurring

the sum challenged and the reasonableness of the amount of those costs

and provided statements in support of its submissions in addition to

witness statements from [APPELLANT] (Director) on behalf of

the applicant. 8. The respondent provided written submissions in addition to a Schedule

of the disputed costs together with an explanation for the relevant fee

earner and grade in the witness statement of [COUNSEL], solicitor at

KDL Law dated 14 May 2025. In that statement Ms [NAME] informed

the tribunal that:

I can confirm that the sum of £8,369.60 is broken down as

follows:

a) Legal Costs - £6,502.00

b) VAT on above - £1,300.40

4

c) Process Server Fee - £420.00 (inclusive of VAT)

d) Interest - £144.20 5.

The legal costs were incurred in the period from issue of the

proceedings up to and including the letter to the Applicant’s

solicitor on 26 July 2024 . This also includes time liaising with

the [NAME] throughout and preparation and

service of the Section 146 Notice. 8. The tribunal finds the costs of the county court proceeding were dealt

with by a summary assessment of costs up to and including 12 June

2024. Had the [NAME] in those proceedings wished to recover

the full costs of that litigation, it was open to the landlord or its solicitor

to seek a detailed assessment of its costs but failed to do so. The tribunal

determines it has no jurisdiction to determine the costs incurred by the

respondent in the County Court proceedings pursuant to the provisions

of CPR 44. 9. Therefore, the tribunal finds only the costs arising from the date of the

service of the s.146 Notice on 19 July 2024 until the satisfaction of the

judgement debt in full (including costs and interest) on 26 July 2025, fall

within the jurisdiction of the tribunal. In the s.146 Notice the respondent

asserted the applicant had breached the terms of the lease having failed

to pay charges and costs in the sum of £27,169.11. However, the tribunal

notes the Notice relies on the payment of the judgement debt and the

further sum of £8,369.60 as being required to remedy the breach of the

terms of the lease and avoid forfeiture. The tribunal finds that cannot be

correct, as the respondent landlord is only entitled to rely on the breach

of the terms of the lease found proven pursuant to s.81 of the Housing

Act 1996, which states:

(a) it is finally determined by (or on appeal from) the

appropriate tribunal or by a court, or by an arbitral tribunal in

proceedings pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration 300

agreement, that the amount of the service charge or

administration charge is payable by him, or;

(b) the tenant has admitted that it is so payable. 10. The non-payment of £8,369.60 was not found to be a breach of the terms

of the lease in the County Court proceedings. The respondent would

not therefore, be entitled to rely upon the non-payment of this sum in

any proceedings for forfeiture it may have subsequently decided to

initiate.

5 11. The tribunal determines that it has jurisdiction to determine

administration charges (legal costs) arising after 26 July 2024 as these

were not the subject of the proceedings in the County Court. 12. The tribunal finds the reasonable costs incurred by the

respondent in the period 19 July 2024 and 26 July 2024 (inc.) cannot

reasonably amount to £8,369.60. Further, the tribunal finds the

respondent has failed to provide a detailed breakdown of dates/times

when these costs in this short period were incurred, by whom or for what

activity. Consequently, the tribunal is unable to determine what, if any

costs were reasonably incurred by the respondent in this period. 13. The tribunal determines that it has jurisdiction to determine

were not the subject of the proceedings in the County Court. 14. Therefore, the tribunal determines the costs of £8,369.60 are not

payable by the applicant to the respondent. 15. In view of its findings above the tribunal finds it is just and equitable to

makes an order under s.20C of the Landlord and Tenant Act 2985

so that none of the respondent’s costs of or arising from this

[NAME] can be added to the service charges. 16. Further, the tribunal considers it is just and equitable to make an order

under Sch. 11, para 5A so that none of the respondent’s costs of or arising

from this [NAME] can be sought from the applicant.

Name:

Judge Tagliavini Date: 9 December 2025

Rights of appeal

6 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] should be made on Form RP PTA available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-rp-pta-[NAME]-for- permission-to-appeal-a-decision-to-the-upper-tribunal-lands-chamber 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).