Flat 6 Ebenezer Chapel, Gunnislake, Cornwall, PL18 9NA: HAV/00HE/LSC/2024/0636 HAV/00HE/LSC/2024/0636
DECISION
[133]The Tribunal determines as follows: - · 2019 The service charge of £511.27 for Flat 6 is determined as reasonable and payable in full as demanded. · 2020 The service charge of £511.27 for Flat 6 is determined as reasonable and payable in full as demanded.• 2021 A service charge of £355 is determined as reasonable, and the balance of £164.70 should be credited to Mr. Pilgrim’s account going forward.• 2022 The service charge is determined at £430. As Mr. Pilgrim paid £591.70, the overpayment of £161.47 should be credited to his account going forward.• 2023 The service charge of £769.74 was less than a one-seventh share of the total expenditure. The service charge for this year is determined at £875.• 2024 A one-seventh share of the total allowable expenses (as supported by invoices) would be £1,463.25. It was determined that a service charge of £1,500 is payable. · 2025 The service charge is determined at £1,600 for the current year. COSTS[134]In order to exercise its discretion to award costs under Rule 13 as above, the Tribunal must find that a party (in this case Mr. Lester) has acted unreasonably in ‘bringing, defending or conducting the proceedings’ .[136]Whilst the failure to keep proper service charge accounts and provide information to leaseholders was clearly in breach of his obligations as a landlord, and not in accordance with the relevant RICS guidelines, the 1985 Act and the terms of the Lease, this conduct was not part of the ‘proceedings’ for the purposes of Rule 13.[137]The Tribunal did find that Mr. Lester had failed to comply with the Directions of May 16th 2025 and this failure had caused some difficulties to the Applicant in preparing his case (and to the Tribunal in making their determination), but there was no evidence of malice or deliberately vexatious behaviour such as to justify a financial penalty.[138]Mr. Lester had acted reasonably during the conduct of the case, and he made a concession early on that he would not be looking to reclaim any of the costs or administration charges from the leaseholders.[139]The Tribunal found that both parties had valid points to make on the issue of service charges, and the figures determined were divided between those where the Applicant’s argument prevailed and those where the Respondent’s submissions were reasonable.[140]In conclusion the Tribunal determines that, because of the need for formal intervention in this case, the Respondent Mr. Lester shall reimburse the Applicant Mr. Pilgrim for the Tribunal fees of £330.[141]No other Order is made as to costs. RIGHTS OF APPEAL[1]A person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) must seek permission to do so by making written application by email to rpsouthern@justice.gov.uk to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case.[2]The application must arrive at the Tribunal within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision.[3]If the person wishing to appeal does not comply with the 28 day time limit, the person shall include with the application for permission to appeal a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28 day time limit; the Tribunal will then decide whether to extend time or not to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed.[4]The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party making the application is seeking.