Tribunal Orders Tenant to Pay £3,240 for New Lease Costs
📌 In brief
The tribunal ruled that a tenant must pay £3,240 in legal and surveyor's fees to the landlord for obtaining a new lease under Section 60 of the Leasehold Reform Act. This ruling is based on the reasonable expenses incurred during the process.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is liable for reasonable costs incurred by a relevant person in connection with obtaining a new lease under section 56 of the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal determined that the tenant must pay £3,240 in costs and disbursements to the landlord under Section 60 of the Leasehold Reform Act.
📜 Headnote Official document
The tribunal determined that the tenant must pay £3,240 in legal and surveyor's fees to the landlord under Section 60 of the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993. The decision was based on reasonable costs incurred by the relevant person.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AE/OC9/2023/0083 Property : 219A [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [NAME] Respondent : [redacted] : [COUNSEL]: [NAME] of application : Determination of costs pursuant to section 60(1) of The Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 Tribunal member(s) : Judge Tagliavini Mrs S Phillips MRICS Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 18 October 2023
DECISION
2 The tribunal’s summary decision 1. The tribunal determines costs and disbursements in the amount of £3,240 (including VAT) are payable by the respondent tenant to the applicant landlord. The application 2. The leaseholder applicant seeks the tribunal’s determination as to the costs payable pursuant to section 60(1) of The Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993. The sum claimed total £3,240 made up of:
(i) Legal costs of £1,200 plus VAT = £1,440.00 (ii) Surveyor’s fees of £1,500 plus VAT = £1,8000 The hearing 3. As neither party requested an oral hearing the application was determined on the documents provided by the applicant. The respondent did not provide any response to the application or provide any documentation seeking to dispute the sums claimed. The tribunal’s decision 4. The tribunal determines the sum of £3,240 (including VAT) is payable by the applicant to the respondent in respect of legal costs and surveyor’s fees. The tribunal’s reasons 5. The relevant parts of Section 60 of the 1993 Act state: (1)Where a notice is given under section 42, then (subject to the provisions of this section) the tenant by whom it is given shall be liable, to the extent that they have been incurred by any relevant person in pursuance of the notice, for the reasonable costs of and incidental to any of the following matters, namely— (a)any investigation reasonably undertaken of the tenant’s right to a new lease; (b)any valuation of the tenant’s flat obtained for the purpose of fixing the premium or any other amount payable by virtue of
3 Schedule 13 in connection with the grant of a new lease under section 56; (c)the grant of a new lease under that section; but this subsection shall not apply to any costs if on a sale made voluntarily a stipulation that they were to be borne by the purchaser would be void. (2)For the purposes of subsection (1) any costs incurred by a relevant person in respect of professional services rendered by any person shall only be regarded as reasonable if and to the extent that costs in respect of such services might reasonably be expected to have been incurred by him if the circumstances had been such that he was personally liable for all such costs.
6. The tribunal was provided with little detail about the nature of the transaction that caused these costs to be incurred. The tribunal considered the Schedule of Legal Costs, the hourly rate and the nature and extent of the work undertaken as well as those of the applicant’s surveyor, the tribunal finds the costs of £3,240 (including VAT) claimed by the applicant are reasonable and payable by the respondent.
Name: Judge Tagliavini
Date: 18 October 2023
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 application for permission must be made to the First- tier Tribunal at the Regional Office which has been dealing with the case. The application should be made on Form RP PTA available at
4 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-rp-pta-application-for- permission-to-appeal-a-decision-to-the-upper-tribunal-lands-chamber 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 11 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Management Company Granted Permission to Skip Consultation for Urgent Repai…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Fire Alarm Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Rent for London Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Fair Rent for Tenancy Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Permission to Carry Out Necessary Works Without Leaseholde…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Pipe Replacement Works
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 is responsible for reasonable costs related to obtaining a new lease.
- Works are considered urgent and essential for safety reasons.
- Works are urgent and there are no objections raised.
- Works are necessary and there is no substantial prejudice to the tenants.
- A fair rent should reflect the market conditions and the state of repair of the property.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- A fair rent determination must consider scarcity and other relevant factors but was not adjusted correctly.
- The tenant is not liable for costs if the process does not meet statutory requirements.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tenant must pay £3,240 in costs to the landlord.
Who was involved?
A tenant and a landlord were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The tribunal decided based on Section 60 of the Leasehold Reform Act, which states that tenants must pay reasonable costs incurred by relevant persons for obtaining a new lease.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Section 60 of the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The landlord argued that the costs incurred were reasonable under Section 60, which the tribunal agreed with.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
It was in favour of the landlord.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should expect to pay reasonable costs if they are seeking a new lease under Section 60.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The schedule of legal costs and surveyor's fees were key documents.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, the decision can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal within 28 days.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.
