Tenant Ordered to Pay £210 in Administration Charges
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided that a tenant must pay £210 in administration charges because they failed to pay service charges. This decision was made under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002.
⚖️ Legal holding
Under paragraph 5 of Schedule 11 to the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, a landlord may charge administration fees when a tenant fails to respond to proceedings.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal ordered the respondents to pay administration charges totaling £210 due to their failure to respond to proceedings.
📜 Headnote Official document
In CHI/24UF/LAC/2019/0020, the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined that the Respondents are liable to pay administration charges totaling £210, following the procedures outlined in the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002.
📚 Full judgment Official document
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
Case Reference
:
CHI/24UF/LAC/2019/0020
Property
:
13 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Applicant: [redacted]
[COMPANY]
:
[NAME]
Respondent: [redacted]
:
Type of Application
:
Administration charges
Tribunal Member(s)
:
Judge D. [NAME] of Directions
:
18th December 2019
DETERMINATION
2 This is a formal order of the Tribunal which must be complied with by the parties. The Tribunal directs that the parties must comply with the STATEMENT ON TRIBUNAL RULES AND PROCEDURE issued 1 February 2019 which is enclosed with the directions.
Background
1. On 19th September 2019 the Applicant issued an application for a determination that the Respondents are liable to pay administration charges totalling £210. These charges comprised £60 for the [NAME]’ fee in sending a reminder to the Respondents with regard to unpaid service charges and £150 for the [NAME]’ fee for referring the case to solicitors.
2. The Respondents had been debarred from taking further part in the proceedings by order of Judge Tildesley OBE on 4th December 2019 for the Respondents’ failure to respond to the proceedings.
3. The Applicants have now supplied evidence that the aforesaid administration charges have been demanded.
Determination
4. On the evidence supplied by the Applicant and in the absence of any representations from the Respondents challenging the administration charges sought, the Tribunal determines, under paragraph 5 of Schedule 11 to the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 that the Respondents are liable to pay the Applicant administration charges totalling £210.
Dated the 18th December 2019
Judge D. [NAME].
3
PERMISSION TO APPEAL
1. A person wishing to appeal the 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 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rules on Cost Recovery Under Building Safety Regulation…
- 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) Tenant Not Liable for Unreasonable Administration Charges
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Secures Section 20C Order Limiting Landlord Costs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Fire Safety Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Excess Works Costs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Permission to Skip Consultation for Urgent Drain Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord awarded costs after RTM claim - First-tier Tribunal Judgment
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Must Get Landlord's Permission Before Adding Structures
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 application follows the correct procedure and provides necessary evidence.
- The landlord can recover costs if the RTM company issues an unjustified claim notice.
- Dispensation from consultation requirements is granted if the works are urgent and necessary.
- Tenants benefit from measures that ensure competitive energy prices.
- A tenant can receive a Section 20C order if the landlord's recovery of costs is unjustified.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- Appeals are dismissed if the application is made outside the specified time limit.
- Applications are rejected if good reasons for late appeals are not provided.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tenant must pay £210 in administration charges.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the property management company.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the evidence provided by the management company and the lack of response from the tenant.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The management company's adherence to the correct procedure and provision of evidence of demand.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they respond to proceedings and provide counter-evidence if applicable.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence of demand for payment and the correct procedure followed by the management company.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, but permission must be sought within 28 days of receiving the decision.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.