Talbot Group Limited v Kishorkumar Valji Khets Kotecha & Ors

Talbot Group Limited v Kishorkumar Valji Khets Kotecha & Ors

The Upper Tribunal held that the FTT was correct to find that interim service charges for years ending March 2021 and 2022 were unreasonable and not payable due to the landlord's failure to provide services, and that repeated charges for items not provided were not justified. The FTT erred in finding that the roof works charge for Flat 14 was not payable due to timing of demand; it was reasonable and payable when demanded. The landlord could in principle include contingency charges, but only if reasonable and supported by evidence, which was lacking here.

Parties
Appellant: Talbot Group Limited; Respondent: Kishorkumar Valji Khets Kotecha; Respondent: Bharti Kotecha; Respondent: Raquel Gonzalez
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Landlord and Tenant Service Charges Appeal / Appeal From First Tier Tribunal to Upper Tribunal (lands Chamber)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part
Legal Topics
Service Charges, Construction of Lease, Interim Charges, Procedural Fairness, Evidence
Landlord and Tenant Law Property Law Service Charges Construction of Lease Interim Charges Procedural Fairness Evidence

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 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Talbot Group Limited

Appellant

Kishorkumar Valji Khets Kotecha

Respondent

Bharti Kotecha

Respondent

Raquel Gonzalez

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interim service charges demanded by the landlord were reasonable and payable
  2. 2 Whether the timing and manner of demands complied with the lease
  3. 3 Whether inclusion of contingency charges was permissible and reasonable

Ratio Decidendi

The Upper Tribunal held that the FTT was correct to find that interim service charges for years ending March 2021 and 2022 were unreasonable and not payable due to the landlord's failure to provide services, and that repeated charges for items not provided were not justified. The FTT erred in finding that the roof works charge for Flat 14 was not payable due to timing of demand; it was reasonable and payable when demanded. The landlord could in principle include contingency charges, but only if reasonable and supported by evidence, which was lacking here.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part

Orders

  • The charge for roof works for Flat 14 (£9,393.27) is reasonable and payable when demanded.
  • No charge for 'Contingency' is payable for any of the four years in question.