Tribunal Orders £370.92 Reimbursement for Unreasonable Service Charges
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal ruled that certain service charges were unreasonable and ordered the landlord to reimburse the tenant the amount of £370.92 plus a £100 refund of the application fee.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to reimbursement for unreasonable service charges under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal found that certain service charges were unreasonable and ordered reimbursement to the tenant.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal ruled that certain service charges were unreasonable and ordered the landlord to reimburse the tenant the amount of £370.92 plus a £100 refund of the application fee.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : MAN/00FF/LSC/2018/0056
Property : [RESPONDENT], [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Applicant: [redacted] : N/A
Respondent: [redacted] : [NAME] of Application : Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 – s 27A
Tribunal Member : Judge M. J. Simpson
Date of Directions : 16 August 2019
ORDER
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2019
Final Order
Further to the Directions of 22nd July 2019 and upon reading the Respondents’ email of 9th August 2019 and the Applicant’s response thereto dated 10th August 2019. And being satisfied that Mr [APPELLANT] has discharged the evidential burden of raising an issue regarding the Service Charges in dispute, and that the Respondent is unwilling or unable to adduce evidence to contradict Mr [APPELLANT]’s assertions.
It is Ordered that:- 1. The Service Charges, the subject of Mr. [APPELLANT]’s application of 8th October 2018, relating to the Reserve Accounts for the years 2012 -2017, have, to the extent alleged by Mr [APPELLANT] (£370.92 in total), been unreasonably incurred.
2. The Respondent shall forthwith reimburse Mr. [APPELLANT] (to the extent that it may not have already done so) the said sum of £370.92 plus the sum of £100 refund of the application fee paid by Mr [APPELLANT].
3. The Tribunal considering it just and equitable to do so, orders that any costs incurred by the respondent or its agent in connection with this application shall not, pursuant to Section 20C, be relevant costs in any service charge computation.
Tribunal Judge Martin Simpson. 16 August 2019.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Orders Reimbursement for Unreasonable Service Charges
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants £2,640 Roof Repairs Dispensation for York Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Balcony Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants £572.18 Rent Repayment Order for Unlicensed HMO Tenancy in …
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Manchester Tribunal Allows Service Charge Determination for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Manchester Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants £3050 Drainage Repairs Dispensation for Assured Tenancy in …
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Allows Urgent Roof Repairs Without Full Consultation in York
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Allows £10,000 Damp Works Without Leaseholder Consultation in York
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Orders £2374 Rent Repayment for Unlicensed HMO Tenancy in Sheffiel…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Permits Urgent Repairs Without Prior Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Reduces Management Fees and Declares Some Service Charges Unpayabl…
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 challenges the reasonableness of service charges under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
- The works are deemed urgent and necessary to prevent damage or structural issues.
- There is no relevant prejudice to the leaseholders regarding the consultation requirements.
- The landlord seeks dispensation from consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
- The landlord has committed an offense under the Housing and Planning Act 2016, entitling the tenant to a rent repayment order.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- No factors listed as all cases favored the claimant.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The decision ordered the landlord to reimburse the tenant £370.92 for unreasonably incurred service charges.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about service charges totaling £370.92 that the tenant claimed were unreasonably incurred.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the tenant, finding that the landlord failed to provide evidence contradicting the tenant's claims.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, section 27A was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The tenant successfully argued that the service charges were unreasonably incurred and provided sufficient evidence to support their claim.
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 reimbursement for unreasonably incurred service charges if they can provide sufficient evidence.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence provided by the tenant, including emails and responses, mattered in the decision.