A dispute between Cos Services Limited and leases Mr Nicholson and Ms Willans with respect to service charges demanded by Cos Services Limited under the lease agreement and whether those service charges were reasonable, and secondly, questions arising under the lease.

The Upper Tribunal case was a reference about, first of all, a dispute between Cos Services Limited and leases Mr Nicholson and Ms Willans with respect to service charges demanded by Cos Services Limited under the lease agreement and whether those service charges were reasonable, and secondly, questions arising under the lease. It is the following judgment that furnishes invaluable insight into the interpretation and application of service charge clauses into residential leases.

Facts

Cos Services Limited (Cos Services) was the freeholder of a residential block of premises of which Mr Nicholson and Ms Willans were lessees. The respondents were lessees under terms, which required them to contribute to the service charge for the maintenance and upkeep of common parts and services of the building. Over time, disputes arose concerning the reasonableness and amount of those service charges.

Cos Services issued demands for service charges to which the Applicants objected. They claimed that these demands were unreasonable; did not represent their services and, in some cases, they were the costs of work which was neither necessary nor correctly done. This led to an initial application to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) which adjudicates on such disputes generally.

Issues

The key questions at stake in this case were:

1. Whether the service charges payable to Cos Services were reasonable?

2. Whether the specific expenses constituting the service charges necessary and actually incurred?

3. Whether the lease allows for adding the amount to the service charges

First Instance

The Respondents at the First-tier Tribunal complained of service charges on the basis that the charges levied had been excessively high, some of the works were unnecessary, some very badly done or not done at all. The subsisting Tribunal opted to do away with detailed descriptions of the work executed, invoices and expert testimonies amongst others.

On many issues, in fact, the First-tier Tribunal decided against the Appellants, which netted off/down the service charges significantly. In reaching its decision that it was indeed unreasonable, some of the expenses alleged by Cos Services to the service charges and some works claimed by Cos Services were not done to a necessary standard/practical utility or not necessitated in the first place, the Tribunal concluded that the current service charges formed a fair and reasonable service charge.

Decision on Appeal

Cos Services appealed the decision of the First-Tier Tribunal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber). The principle thrust of the appeal was to seek to challenge the reductions the First-Tier Tribunal had made and to pursue an argument for the reimposition of the full amount of the original service charges.

The Upper Tribunal has carefully considered the findings of the First-tier Tribunal relating to the rationale for the reductions and the evidence on which those decisions were based. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal should be upheld by the Upper Tribunal in that the charges demanded were excessive and to a large extent lacking in support from work supposedly done.

The Upper Tribunal further underlined the reasonableness of service charges and put the requirement on landlords to particularsise claims they intend to make against leaseholders. It called for reinsistence that service charge must be limited to the amount properly incurred and reasonably spent and essential to meet the services or benefits provided to lessees.

Comments

The judgment in Cos Services Limited v Nicholson & Willans has provided substantial guidance and rulings for both the landlord and tenancy fraternity, especially on the management of service charges under residential leases and general dispute resolution arising therefrom. A number of key points arise from the case as follows:

1. Reasonableness of Charges: All service charges should be reasonable and justified, with detailed accounts of the work carried out and proof of the necessity for the same work.

2. Proper documentation and transparency regarding the question of the preparation and division of service charges must prevail. Landlords will need to keep very close books of spending and reasons for spending.

3. Quality and Necessity of Works: Charges should reflect a fair view of works that are appropriate and satisfactorily done. Tenants cannot be charged by the landlords for works not of an appropriate level or poorly done.

4. The Role of Tribunals: Setting up Tribunals, as the First-Tier and the Upper Tribunals are in this case, is very vital since they both enunciate and rule on service charge disputes. The decisions of this case therefore help to define what is implied in fair practice and following the terms of the lease.

5. Precedent for the Future: This adjudication case shall in the future be referred to as a precedent when service charge disagreements arise, and it advises on what consists of reasonable charges and the proof for the listing.

In that sense, Cos Services Limited v Nicholson & Willans has breached a sort of balance with regard to the landlord's rights to recoup costs, yet there is a provision at the same time for safeguards for lessees against unreasonable and unjustifiable charges. The case had re-affirmed the principles of the need for fairness, transparency, and accountability in administration coming with service charges in residential leases.

Valuation Services provided by The Ringley Group

Bank Valuations

Development Valuations

Rent Reviews

Tax Valuations

Balance Sheet Valuations

Social