Court Rejects Landlord’s Plumbing Upgrade Plea | Guild of Residential Landlords

The High Court has rejected a landlord’s plea to clarify whether the leaseholders of a block of 194 flats should pay for a new heating and hot water system.

Leaseholders of the art deco style red and yellow candy-striped landmark Northwood Hall, Highgate, have argued that upgrading the block’s plumbing would unfairly increase the repairing obligations in their contracts.

The case has simmered for over five years, and in 2019, 37 leaseholders took the landlord, Triplark Ltd, to London County Court and then the First-Tier Tribunal.

Now, the landlord has taken the case to the High Court, asking for three declarations:

Backing the landlord’s right to replace the heating and hot water system with another system that is not identical but still meets the landlord’s obligation to provide the service
Confirmation that the landlord can disconnect and reconnect each flat to the hot water system provided the work is necessary and falls within the proper administration and maintenance of the building.
Agreement that the landlord can supply hot water and heating to each flat, leaving the tenant to decide if they want to connect while decommissioning the existing system.

Upgrade or replacement?

The new hot water system the landlord wants to install functions differently from the current system, which the leaseholders claim is beyond their maintenance obligations in their tenancy agreements.

The landlord argued the tenancy agreements allowed them to charge for the upgrade.

Instead of heating hot water in communal boilers and running a supply to each flat, the new system heats water, which is sent to a heat exchanger in each flat, flowing into the flat to provide central heating and hot water.

Each flat would need two new pieces of equipment to connect to the system, whereas currently, each flat only needs one device.

Judge rejects landlord’s claim

Judge Charles Morrison ruled the changes to the plumbing were beyond the maintenance obligation of the current leases and would make the leaseholders liable for unforeseen costs when the leases were signed.

He said: “Whilst previously the hot water arrived at the taps and radiators, now a heat exchanger is required, which leaseholders must repair. This is an additional burden not contemplated by the parties upon entering the lease. On this proposition, I find myself in complete agreement with the leaseholders.”

The judge declined to make the declarations and dismissed the claim.

What the law says about maintenance and replacements

Deciding whether the land or tenant pays service charges is determined by the wording of the lease.

Service charges generally relate to the upkeep of communal areas, such as stairways, corridors, parking areas, and gardens. Leaseholders are sometimes asked to contribute to occasional repairs, such as a new roof or windows to a block of flats.

Landlords cannot charge leaseholders a service charge for items not included in their tenancy agreements.