1B Scarborough Road, London, N4 4LX LON/00AP/OC9/2021/0050
DECISION
[10]It is clear that the Applicant is liable for the surveyors costs pursuant to s60 of the Act. Section 60 1(b) specifically states that she is liable for any valuation of the flat obtained for the purpose of fixing the premium. The fact that the sums were not claimed prior to completion does not preclude that liability. Section 56(3) of the act does not assist the Applicant because that merely states that a tenant shall not be entitled to require the execution of any such new lease until sums are payable including those sums under section 60. This does not mean that because completion took place without payment of the surveyor’s fees it is not open to the Respondent to claim those fees. Both parties worked on the common misapprehension that all fees had been paid. In the event the Respondent had overlooked the fact that she had not claimed the surveyor’s fees. These sums are recoverable under section 60 albeit that completion has taken place. To decide otherwise would be to deprive the Respondent of a clear entitlement under section 60. The Applicant’s solicitor was unable to identify any authority to make good her arguments in relation to estoppel or otherwise.[11]The Applicant’s solicitor also challenged the amount of the valuation fee. She put forward two cases in which different fees had been allowed however her submission could no go no further than stating that the valuation “appears excessive”. The Tribunal does not consider the valuation fee was excessive and the fee is reasonable and payable.[12]The Applicant’s solicitor also challenged the legal fees sought by the Respondent notwithstanding the fact that these had already been agreed and paid. She provided a list of items that she sought to challenge and offered an alternative amount again relying on decisions on section 60 costs without providing any explanation as to why they were relevant to the facts and circumstances of the present case. In general terms the Tribunal found the submissions in relation to the legal costs unattractive and despite strenuous efforts by the Applicant’s solicitor in seeking to challenge individual items of her opponent’s costs the costs overall appeared reasonable. Reg 13 costs[13]As already indicated neither side’s solicitors behaved properly in this case. The case has been unreasonably extended and complicated by entrenched litigation between two solicitors who have fallen out. It is not in the interests of their clients to expend disproportionate amounts of time and cost on issues which should be resolved by concession. In these circumstances the tribunal will not award any costs to either side. Judge Shepherd 12th November 2021 ANNEX - RIGHTS OF APPEAL Appealing against the tribunal’s decisions[1]A written application for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional tribunal office which has been dealing with the case.[2]The application for permission to appeal must arrive at the Regional tribunal office within 28 days after the date this decision is sent to the parties.[3]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.[4]The application for permission to appeal must state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party making the application is seeking. All applications for permission to appeal will be considered on the papers[5]Any application to stay the effect of the decision must be made at the same time as the application for permission to appeal.