The costs of dangerous cladding – leaseholders position – Nearly Legal

Posted March 27th, 2018 in costs, health & safety, housing, landlord & tenant, news, repairs, service charges by tracey

‘First Tier Tribunal LON/00AH/LSC/2017/0435 – Firstport Property Services Ltd v various leaseholders of Citiscape. We previously saw the Salford decision on the costs of a ‘waking watch’ in a tower with ‘Grenfell’ style cladding, but this was the first, keenly awaited, decision on the liability of leaseholders of an affected building (here in Croydon) to pay for the costs of removal and replacement of such cladding under their leases.’

Full Story

Nerarly Legal, 26th March 2018

Source: nearlylegal.co.uk

Homeowners battle freeholder over £20,000 ‘Grenfell bill’ – Daily Telegraph

Posted March 5th, 2018 in housing, landlord & tenant, London, news, repairs, service charges, tribunals by tracey

‘Residents of a luxury north London apartment block are battling their freeholder over who should pay a multi-million-pound bill to replace dangerous Grenfell-style cladding, and for the wages of fire marshals.’

Full Story

Daily Telegraph, 5th March 2018

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Westmark (Lettings) Limited v Peddle & Ors [2017] UKUT 449 (LC) – Tanfield Chambers

Posted January 9th, 2018 in appeals, costs, landlord & tenant, news, service charges, tribunals by sally

‘For the purposes of Section 20B(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the 1985 Act”) a relevant cost is incurred by an intermediate landlord when that intermediate landlord receives a demand from its own landlord in respect of services provided by it or a superior landlord. A residential tenant’s 18-month limitation period begins to run only when his or her immediate landlord receives a demand incurring the cost, not when the superior landlord providing the service originally incurs its own cost.’

Full Story

Tanfield Chambers, 8th January 2018

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Iris Hyslop v 38/41 CHG Residents Co Limited [2017] UKUT 398 (LC) – Tanfield Chambers

Posted December 8th, 2017 in appeals, landlord & tenant, news, service charges, time limits, tribunals by sally

‘The First Tier Tribunal is entitled to rely on an applicant to send its application, but not the FTT’s subsequent decision, to the respondents to that application. Time will not start running for a party to apply for a permission to appeal until the FTT has itself provided a copy of its decision to that party.’

Full Story

Tanfield Chambers, 1st December 2017

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Incurred and incurred again – Nearly Legal

‘Under section 20B(1) Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, a service charge must be demanded of the tenant within 18 months of the relevant cost having been incurred by the landlord. But what happens when there is a head landlord demanding a charge from an intermediate landlord who, in turn, passes the cost on to their lessees? When does the 18 months run from?’

Full Story

Nearly Legal, 1st December 2017

Source: nearlylegal.co.uk

Excessive service charges and what to do about them – 4 KBW

Posted November 24th, 2017 in news, service charges by sally

‘Service charges are fees that homeowners often commit to pay under the terms of the lease they enter into when they purchase their homes.[1] They are increasingly common in share-of-freehold properties, and commonly include the costs of insurance, lighting, maintenance, cleaning and the repair of common parts such as lifts and gyms, as well as fees for the purchase, sale, sublet or alteration of a flat. They can also effect the purchase of some freehold properties.’

Full Story

4 KBW, 14th November 2017

Source: www.4kbw.net

JLK Limited v Emmanuel Chiedu Ezekwe (and others) [2017] UKUT 277 (LC) – Tanfield Chambers

Posted August 22nd, 2017 in appeals, housing, landlord & tenant, leases, news, service charges, tribunals by sally

‘The Upper Tribunal upheld the First Tier Tribunal’s decision that units of accommodation designed for students were ‘dwellings’, but overturned the decision that such units were ‘separate dwellings’. As such, the FTT did not have jurisdiction to determine the amount of service charges payable by the units’ leaseholders under sections 18 to 30 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.’

Full Story

Tanfield Chambers, 31st July 2017

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Corvan (Properties) Limited v Maha Ahmed Abdel-Mahmoud [2017] UKUT 228 (LC) – Tanfield Chambers

Posted August 22nd, 2017 in agreements, landlord & tenant, leases, news, service charges by sally

‘The FTT had correctly ruled that a management agreement was for a term of more than twelve months, and therefore a long-term qualifying agreement for the purposes of s.20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.’

Full Story

Tanfield Chambers, 31st July 2017

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Cant Pay – Nearly Legal

‘It is rare, if we are entirely honest, for a First Tier Tribunal decision on service charges to be exciting. It is even rarer for there to be mystery and police raids, and “Immunity from Treason” notices, and debts of “Trillions of pounds”, and something called an ‘equity lawyer’. Yet here they all are, and more, in what on the face of it was a dispute over annual service charges of about £1200.’

Full Story

Nearly Legal, 23rd July 2017

Source: nearlylegal.co.uk

The Reasonableness of Insurance Premiums – Tanfield Chambers

‘Leases generally require leaseholders to contribute to insurance of their block – whether by including the cost in the general service charges or by way of a separate charge known as an “insurance rent”.’

Full Story

Tanfield Chambers, 22nd June 2017

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Southwark LBC v Akhtar Upper Tribunal [2017] UKUT 150 (LC) – Tanfield Chambers

‘The Upper Tribunal reversed decisions from the First Tier Tribunal in respect of the validity of estimated service demands, the requirements to prove the service of a notice under section 20B in light of the incorporation of section 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 in the lease, and whether a tenant had waived the Landlord’s non-compliance with service charge mechanism of the lease by conduct.’

Full Story

Tanfield Chambers, 1st June 2017

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Oliver v Sheffield City Council [2017] EWCA Civ. 225 – Tanfield Chambers

‘A local authority was required to give credit to leaseholders for funds received from third-parties when recovering a contribution to the cost of major works.’

Full Story

Tanfield Chambers, 1st June 2017

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

An unsatisfactory situation – Tanfield Chambers

‘Since the Supreme Court turned the law of dispensation from the consultation requirements upside down in Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson [2013] UKSC 14; [2013] 2 EGLR 45, the Upper Tribunal has been troubled with very few cases involving the requirements to consult leaseholders on major works. However, the decision in Lessees of Foundling Court and O’Donnell Court v Camden London Borough Council and others [2016] UKUT 366 (LC); [2016] EGLR 59 has rewritten preconceptions as to who needs to be consulted and caused landlords some new headaches.’

Full Story

Tanfield Chambers, 12th June 2017

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Service charge disputes and recovery of costs – Nearly Legal

Posted May 30th, 2017 in costs, landlord & tenant, news, service charges, tribunals by sally

‘This was an appeal to the UT on various issue arising from an FTT decision. We will not dwell on the issue of specific charges not being consulted on under s.20, but not – as the UT found, overturning the FTT – subject to a Qualifying Long Term Agreement, because the more general point concerned the landlord having put some £11,000 of legal costs on the drawn out service charge disputes through on the service charge (not, we should note, as an administrative charge).’

Full Story

Nearly Legal, 28th May 2017

Source: nearlylegal.co.uk

Southwark LBC v Akhtar and Stel LLC – Arden Chambers

‘The Upper Tribunal has held that an estimated service charge that had not been demanded in accordance with a lease would not have been payable but for the lessee taking out a loan from the lessor to pay it and thereby waiving strict compliance with the terms of the lease; s.7, Interpretation Act 1978 does not apply to notices served under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 unless a lease provides that s.196 Law of Property Act 1925 is to apply to the service of notices’

Full story

Arden Chambers, 20th April 2017

Source: www.ardenchambers.com

Northern Waters – Nearly Legal

Posted April 25th, 2017 in contracts, housing, local government, news, rent, service charges, water, water companies by sally

‘Rochdale BH is a social housing provider (of what was the council’s housing stock). The issue in this case – heard as a preliminary issue – was whether Rochdale BH was a water reseller under the terms of The Water Resale Order 2006 in that charges for water it made as a part of the rent.’

Full story

Nearly Legal, 23rd April 2017

Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk

Service Charges: No Double Recovery – Local Government Law

Posted April 6th, 2017 in appeals, costs, housing, leases, local government, news, service charges by tracey

‘In Sheffield City Council v Oliver (2007) EWCA Civ 225 the local authority was unsuccessful in its appeal from an Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) decision concerning the funding of major refurbishment works to several blocks of flats of which it is the freeholder.’

Full story

Local Government Law, 5th April 2017

Source: www.11kbw.com/blogs/local-government-law

Primeview Developments Ltd v Ahmed – Arden Chambers

‘The Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) has held that it is was not unreasonable conduct for the purposes of r.13(1)(b), Tribunal Procedure Rules, for a landlord to seek to rely on an agreement that service charges were payable, even if that agreement was subsequently determined to be void. Nor did the landlord’s failure to mediate amount to unreasonable conduct in circumstances where the prospects of a reaching an agreement were slight and the costs of mediation likely to be disproportionate. It also held that orders pursuant to s.20C, Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, should not treat participating leaseholders differently from one another on the basis of their involvement in proceedings. The focus should be on the landlord’s degree of success regardless of each individual leaseholder’s involvement.’

Full story

Arden Chambers, 3rd March 2017

Source: www.ardenchambers.com

Lessons in understanding: Unfairness and Estoppel by Convention in the Upper Tribunal – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted February 22nd, 2017 in estoppel, leases, news, service charges, tribunals by sally

‘Towards the end of last year, the Upper Tribunal (“UT”) handed down decisions in two cases involving estoppel by convention:

Admiralty Park Management Ltd v Ojo [2016] UKUT 0421 (LC) 8 September 2016 (“Ojo”); and

Bucklitsch and anor v Merchant Exchange Management Company Limited [2016] UKUT 0527 (LC) 13 December 2016 (“Bucklitsch”).’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 18th January 2017

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Jetha v Basildon Court Residents Company Ltd – Arden Chambers

Posted February 22nd, 2017 in appeals, covenants, estoppel, landlord & tenant, leases, news, service charges, tribunals by sally

‘The Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) has given guidance on the approach to be followed by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) when considering whether there is an estoppel by convention which prevents a leaseholder from denying the payability of a service charge which has not been demanded in accordance with the terms of the lease.’

Full story

Arden Chambers, 16th February 2017

Source: www.ardenchambers.com