PAS PROPERTY SERVICES LIMITED v MR & MRS S D HAYES
Decision date: 27 January 2014
Neutral citation: [2014] UKUT 26 (LC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: high
This appeal concerned whether a landlord could recover the cost of gas used by a common heating system (CHS) via a pooled leasehold service charge for all flats. The Upper Tribunal upheld the LVT: the service charge wording did not authorise pooled charging of CHS gas used to heat individual flats, although gas for heating common parts may be recoverable as a Part II Service; gas consumed within individual flats is recoverable under the Fourth Schedule paragraph 2.3 by reimbursement and, on the evidence, must be apportioned by measured (metered) consumption. The appeal was dismissed and limited costs awarded to the tenants.
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high
Wide service‑charge or “sweeper” clauses must be read in context and will not be used to supply clear charging powers omitted from the lease; pooled recovery of a supplier’s charge for fuel consumed within individual flats requires express lease wording. Where reimbursement provisions (Fourth Schedule para 2.3) apply, a “fair and proper proportion” is to be determined reasonably (by the landlord’s surveyor), and where meters are provided and no other reasonable apportionment exists, charging by measured consumption is the only reasonable basis.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
The tribunal observed (non‑bindingly) that earlier LVT decisions favouring pooled recovery have limited weight if reached on written representations without full contextual construction; and that costs of metering/third‑party billing (for example Switch2 charges) can, subject to reasonableness, be recoverable as meter rents or expenses under reimbursement provisions.