Assethold Limited v Alexandra Adam & Ors.

Assethold Limited v Alexandra Adam & Ors.

The landlord's decision to implement a waking watch as an interim measure in reliance on a professional report indicating an intolerable fire risk was both rational and objectively reasonable in the circumstances, even though the report was later found to be flawed. The cost was reasonably incurred for one month for both blocks, subject to a reduction for the poor standard of service.

Parties
Appellant: Assethold Limited; Respondents: Alexandra Adam and 14 other leaseholders of Corben Mews
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Landlord and Tenant Service Charges Appeal / Appeal From First Tier Tribunal (property Chamber) to Upper Tribunal (lands Chamber)
Outcome
Appeal allowed. FTT decision set aside. Tribunal substitutes its own decision.
Legal Topics
Service Charges, Reasonableness of Costs, Professional Advice, Fire Safety, Section 19(1) Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
Landlord and Tenant Law Property Law Service Charges Reasonableness of Costs Professional Advice Fire Safety Section 19(1) Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Assethold Limited

Appellant

Alexandra Adam and 14 other leaseholders of Corben Mews

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Landlord and Tenant Service Charges Appeal / Appeal From First Tier Tribunal (property Chamber) to Upper Tribunal (lands Chamber)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the cost of a waking watch was reasonably incurred under section 19(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
  2. 2 Whether the landlord's reliance on professional advice justified the service charge
  3. 3 Whether the First-tier Tribunal applied the correct legal test for reasonableness

Ratio Decidendi

The landlord's decision to implement a waking watch as an interim measure in reliance on a professional report indicating an intolerable fire risk was both rational and objectively reasonable in the circumstances, even though the report was later found to be flawed. The cost was reasonably incurred for one month for both blocks, subject to a reduction for the poor standard of service.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. FTT decision set aside. Tribunal substitutes its own decision.

Orders

  • The sum of £14,000 for one month of waking watch for both blocks is reasonably incurred and recoverable by the landlord, subject to proper demand.