VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal Appoints Manager for Residential Properties Under Landlord and Tenant Act 1987

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal appointed a person as the manager of several flats in London for a period of two years. This decision was made under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tribunal may appoint a manager for residential properties under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987.

Topics

appointment of managerLandlord and Tenant Act 1987property management

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 s.24

The appropriate tribunal can appoint a manager to manage residential properties under certain conditions. These conditions include when a relevant person breaches obligations related to property management, makes unreasonable service charges, or fails to comply with approved codes of practice. Additionally, the tribunal must find it just and convenient to make the appointment based on all the circumstances.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.

📖 Technical summary

The tribunal appointed a manager for certain residential properties under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987.

📜 Headnote Official document

The tribunal appointed Mr Mark Jones as the manager of certain residential properties located at Flats 1-9 Haberdashers Place, Pitfield Street, London N1 6BS, effective from 1 November 2021 until 31 October 2023, subject to the renewal of his professional indemnity insurance.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

1

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) AT 10 ALFRED PLACE, [POSTCODE]

Case references

: LON/00AM/LAM/2021/0009

HMCTS code :

V: CVPREMOTE Property :

[ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Applicant: [redacted]

Respondent: [redacted]

[NAME] [COUNSEL], [RESPONDENT] :

Mr [COUNSEL] [NAME] of application :

Appointment of manager

Tribunal members :

Judge Tagliavini Mrs A Flynn MA MRICS

Date of hearing. :

21 October 2021

Date of decision

:

21 October 2021

DECISION AND ORDER APPOINTING A MANAGER

2 Covid-19 pandemic: description of hearing This has been a remote paper hearing which has been consented to by the parties. The form of remote hearing was V: VIDEOREMOTE. A face-to-face hearing was not held because it was not practicable, and all issues could be determined in a remote hearing. The documents that the tribunal was referred are contained in the electronic bundle numbered 1-463. ____________________________________________________ The tribunal’s summary decision 1. The tribunal appoints Mr [NAME] as the manager of the subject premises known as [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] with effect from 1 November 2021 until 31 October 2023 on confirmation that the Professional Indemnity Insurance of Stock Page Stock has been renewed and covers Mr [NAME] activities as a tribunal appointed Manager and Receiver.

2. In default of the above condition being met, the Management Order will not take effect. _________________________________________________________ The application 1. This an application under the provisions of section 24 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 seeking the tribunal’s appointment of Mr [APPELLANT] of [NAME] as the Manager of the subject premises.

2. In the application the premises were identified as Flats 1-9 and Shops 63-79 & 79A together with Garages at Rear. However, before the hearing held on 21 October 2021, the parties made and jointly signed a Statement of Agreed Facts dated 19/10/21, in which the premises to be subject to any Order are primarily the residential parts i.e., [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] and does not include the commercial units, except in limited circumstances concerning the recovery of expenditure.

3. Notwithstanding the parties’ agreement to the appointment of Mr [NAME], the tribunal were provided with a written Management Proposal dated 27 August 2021, the 8-page Draft Management Order with H.M. Land Registry plan attached, and the opportunity to hear directly from him at the hearing of the application, in order to satisfy itself he was a fit and proper person to be appointed.

3 The tribunal’s decision and reasons 4. The tribunal considers upon receipt of written confirmation on or before 31 October 2021, that the Professional Indemnity Insurance Policy of £2m for Stock Page Stock has been renewed, and covers the activities of Mr [NAME] as a tribunal appointed manager, it is appropriate to appoint Mr [NAME] as Manager with effect from 1 November 2021 for a period of two years i.e. until 31 October 2023 under the terms of the Draft Management Order included in the hearing bundle (pp.196 to 205), subject to this Draft Management Order being amended at paragraph 1 so that it reads the appointment is for a period of two years (not five years as originally specified).

5. In reaching its decision the tribunal was persuaded by the documentary and oral evidence as well as the parties’ agreement, that it is appropriate to make the Order sought on the condition set being met, with each party paying its own costs. In default of the above condition being met, the Order appointing [NAME] as Manager will not take effect.

Name: Judge Tagliavini

Date: 21 October 2021

Rights of appeal from the decision of the tribunal 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 application for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with the case. The application for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office within 28 days after the tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the person making the application. If the application is not made within the 28-day time limit, such application 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 application for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The application 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 making the application is seeking. If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 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

  • The tribunal was satisfied that the proposed manager was a fit and proper person for the role.
  • The parties agreed to the appointment of the manager.
  • The tribunal was persuaded by the documentary and oral evidence presented.
  • The manager's professional indemnity insurance policy was confirmed to be renewed and cover his activities.
  • The management order was amended to specify a two-year appointment period.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The original proposal for a five-year management period was not accepted.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The tribunal appointed Mr Mark Jones as the manager of certain residential properties for a period of two years.

Who was involved?

The applicant requested the appointment of a manager, and the respondent agreed to the appointment.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to appoint Mr Mark Jones as the manager based on his qualifications and the agreement between the parties.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 was applied to appoint the manager.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the agreement between the parties and Mr Mark Jones' qualifications.

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 can seek the appointment of a manager through the First-tier Tribunal if they meet the necessary conditions.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence included a written management proposal, a draft management order, and an agreement between the parties.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) within 28 days.

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

It is recommended to get advice from a qualified solicitor for a case 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.