In the first of a series, this article examines the impact of the Derby case on how local authorities should apply and charities can claim business rate relief.
In the recent case of Ghosh v Hanover Gate Mansions Limited and Hanover Gate Mansions (Park Road) Limited, the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) was asked when exactly an unsigned contract came into effect in a dispute concerning whether a landlord needed to undertake Section 20 consultation.
Mr Ghosh held a long lease of a flat. Hanover Gate Mansions Limited (“Hanover Gate”) was his landlord. Hanover Gate procured management services under a management contract with Faraday Property Management Limited (“Faraday”). The management contract was drafted on Faraday’s standard terms, stating Faraday would “perform the services from 12 June 2017 to 11 June 2018. After this period, the Agreement shall continue on the terms set out, subject to termination under Clause 7”.
Hanover Gate’s solicitor made minor amendments. However, the draft contract (which stated it started on 12 June 2017) was never signed or dated before Faraday commenced providing services on 12 June 2017.
Section 20 Consultation
Section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“Section 20”) provides that before a landlord enters into a QLTA for works or services, it must consult with residents paying a variable service charge following a process set out in Regulations. A QLTA is an agreement for more than 12 months, where the cost to each resident is more than £100 per accounting year. If a landlord fails to consult correctly, the amount it can recover is capped to £100 per year (unless dispensation is obtained).
Both parties agreed that if the management contract between Hanover Gate and Faraday started on 12 June 2017, it was a QLTA: this is because the earliest it could terminate was 12 June 2018. The issue was when it started.
Mr Ghosh argued it commenced on 12 June 2017 and was, therefore, a QLTA. Since the landlord did not consult him about the management contract in accordance with Section 20, Mr Ghosh argued his service charge contribution should be capped at £100.
Hanover Gate argued 12 June 2017 was just a periodic trial basis, and there was no formal contract, so no QLTA, meaning the full amount could be recovered.
In the first instance, the First-tier Tribunal agreed with the landlord that the management contract was not a QLTA, as it did not commence until Hanover Gate made payment to Faraday at a later date after 12 June 2017.
The Upper Tribunal overturned the original decision. It held there is no general rule on contract formation that performance of a contract only takes place when goods or services are paid for. Applying authority from the 19th century, the Upper Tribunal preferred Mr Ghosh’s argument that the management contract took effect by performance when management services commenced on 12 June 2017. Therefore, it was held the contract was a QLTA, and as Section 20 consultation was not carried out, Mr Ghosh’s contribution was capped to £100 per year.
The case provides a useful reminder to be cautious and check whether agreements your organisation is entering into meet the QLTA definition and trigger Section 20 consultation. Although not substantial in this case (recovery was capped at £100 instead of the £218.73 claimed by Hanover Gate), failure to consult properly can have significant financial consequences for landlords.
The ruling in Ghosh was based on established principles of contract formation and has wider implications beyond the context of Section 20 consultation. In the language of Ghosh, it is not unimaginable that some contracts may be negotiated but left in a desk drawer, during which time goods or services may be exchanged on uncertain terms, leading to a potential dispute. In our view, Ghosh serves an important lesson to landlords for seeking clear legal guidance and following best practice when drafting and completing agreements.
For more information
For more information about this case and service charges generally, please contact Emma Hardman.
“Monitoring the Mental Health Act in 2018/19” published by the CQC, has found that although improvements have been made, healthcare services need to do more to comply with their human rights duties.
The IPPR North report says that this Parliament must be the “Devolution Parliament” to truly “level up” the country.
On 20 January 2020, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) issued Advice for Building Owners of Multi-storey, Multi-occupied Residential Buildings.
The Society for Computers and Law (SCL) has introduced an Adjudication Scheme for IT Projects and Services.
The board of a housing services company was reportedly dismissed in December 2019 following the discovery of a variety of safety and hygiene issues in the properties they manage.
The Heat Network (Metering and Billing) Regulations 2014 (the Regulations) place certain responsibilities on anyone supplying and charging for heating, cooling or hot water (the heat supplier).
In our latest Company Secretary Update, we focus on the Queen’s Speech over Christmas and the recommendations and commitments in relation to housing.
So after two days of legal argument, the Supreme Court have now retired to reach their decision in the joined cases of Tomlinson-Blake v the Royal Mencap Society and Shannon v Rampersad.
Anthony Collins Solicitors has revealed details of its annual social impact, including advising on funding deals for building 19,603 new homes and setting up 90 new charities.
To receive invitations to our events, as well as information and articles on legal issues and sector developments that are of interest to you, please sign up to Newsroom.