Tenant's Application Struck Out Due to Lack of Jurisdiction

OUTCOME: Struck Out

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Case reference : CAM/26KF/LSC/2025/0666 Property : 34 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Applicant: [redacted] Respondent: [redacted] : [COUNSEL], [NAME] of [NAME] : Liability to pay Administration charges Tribunal : Judge Bernadette MacQueen Date of Notice : 28 November 2025

[NAME] A CASE MANAGEMENT HEARING PURSUANT TO RULE 9(2) OF THE TRIBUNAL (PROCEDURE) (FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL) (PROPERTY CHAMBER) RULES 2013

Decision

1. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine the [NAME] and with the agreement of the parties, the matter is struck out. 2. The Tribunal makes an order under section 20C of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 so that none of the landlord’s costs of the Tribunal proceedings may be passed to the lessees through any service charge.

2 3. The Tribunal makes an order under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, Schedule 11 paragraph 5A, that there is no liability for the lessees to pay the landlord’s administration charge in respect of litigation costs for this Tribunal [NAME].

Background

4. The Applicant made an [NAME] to the Tribunal under section 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act seeking determination as to whether the cost of £5,000 plus VAT was payable under the lease for retrospective consent from the landlord to allow the tenant to use the front garden of the Property as a driveway.

5. The Tribunal determined that a case management hearing was necessary in order to clarify the issues in dispute. The Tribunal further noted that as the [NAME] appeared to relate to administration charges, the Tribunal intended to treat the [NAME] as one made under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. Case Management Hearing 6. The Tribunal held a case management hearing on 28 November 2025 by [NAME]). The Applicant attended the hearing. [APPELLANT] appeared on behalf of the Respondent supported by [RESPONDENT] of [NAME]. Agreed Matters 7. The Respondent confirmed that at no time had a fee of £5,000 been demanded from the Applicant. The Applicant had approached the Respondent seeking retrospective permission to allow parking at the front of the Property. The Respondent confirmed that as the Lease did not contain parking rights, a deed of variation to the lease would be required. This would necessitate legal work and there would be a cost involved in this.

8. Without prejudice negotiations had commenced and it was agreed that these discussions needed to continue.

9. Both parties therefore agreed that there was no determination that the Tribunal could make under section 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 or Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. [NAME]

10. In light of the representations received by the Parties and for the reasons set out in this decision, the [NAME] is struck out on grounds that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in respect of it.

3 11. The Respondent confirmed that they would make no costs applications in relation to the proceedings and therefore did not object to the Tribunal [NAME] and order under section 20C of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for limitation of the Respondent’s costs of the proceedings, or an order under paragraph 5A of Schedule 11 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 to reduce or extinguish the tenant’s liability to pay an administration charge in respect of litigation costs.

12. The Tribunal determines that it is just and equitable in the circumstances for an order to be made under section 20C of the 1985 Act and paragraph 5A of Schedule 11 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002.

Name: Judge Bernadette MacQueen Date: 28 November 2025

4

Rights of appeal 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] 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).