Service charge and outgoings

Both residential and commercial landlords aim for a 'clear lease': where the costs of repair, maintenance and provision of services are met by the tenants rather than being deducted from the rent received.

Where a building is in multi-occupation it is sensible for repair, maintenance and services to be controlled by the landlord, with the costs being recovered from tenants through the service charge.

In commercial leases the tenant's obligation to pay service charge, and the landlord's ability to recover costs, are entirely contractual and are not subject to statutory control. In residential leases the tenant's obligation to pay depends on there being a contractual service charge clause, but the landlord's ability to appoint managing agents, carry out works and to recover costs is heavily regulated by statute.

Service charges in commercial property—RICS professional statement

Commercial service charges are not (yet at least) subject to statutory control. However, the first edition of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) professional statement, ‘Service charges in commercial property’ (the Service Charge Statement), is effective for all service charge periods commencing on and from 1 April 2019. It supersedes the

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Property News

Insolvency, declarations of trust, loan agreements, artificial asset protection, sham transactions, transactions defrauding creditors, interspousal asset transfers, change of position defence and wife’s entitlement to share of husband’s assets (Sayers v Dixon)

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: The court held that six declarations of trust (DoTs) executed by the transferor (Mr Dixon) in favour of his wife (Mrs Dixon) constituted transactions defrauding his creditors within the meaning of section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) and that two of them, purporting to transfer all his future assets and income to Mrs Dixon, along with an accompanying loan agreement, were shams which were void and ineffective. It set aside the DoTs and ordered Mrs Dixon to restore the value of three transferred properties (which had been converted into £551,589 cash) to Mr Dixon’s trustees in bankruptcy (trustees) together with interest of £101,726. It also ordered an account to be taken of the funds that had been transferred to Mrs Dixon or on her behalf by Mr Dixon over the seven years between the date of the DoTs and his bankruptcy. The court dismissed Mrs Dixon’s defence of change of position to the trustees’ claim for restoration, finding that even if such a defence were generally available (which is unclear), she had not acted in good faith and could not rely on it. It also dismissed her defence that, having been married to Mr Dixon for many years, she was entitled to half his assets and/or an entitlement to a share of them by virtue of a right to be maintained. Written by Jonathan Lopian, barrister at New Square Chambers, who acted for the successful claimants.

View Property by content type :

Popular documents