Speak to our friendly staff directly  +44 (0)20 7242 2523

A leading set specialising in commercial, construction, insurance and property law

Insights
This document is from our archive and no action should be taken in reliance on it without specific legal advice.

OM Property Management v Hughes & Others

Citation[2012] UKUT 258 (LC) [2012] PLSCS 198

Subject matter: Landlord and tenant, Service charges, Major works, Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, Services Charges (Consultation Requirements)(England) Regulations 2003, Consultation notice, Compliance with statutory consultation requirements, Failing to specify end date for consultation. 

The failure expressly to specify a calendar date by which observations in response to a major works consultation notice were to be made did not amount to non-compliance with paragraph 11(10)(c)(iii) Part 2 Schedule 4 Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003.  It was sufficient that the recipient of the notice could work out the date from a form of words; it was not essential to specify a date of the calendar year by name.

A management company’s stated intention in a consultation notice to enter into a contract with a particular contractor did not suggest that the management company had already made up its mind and that the consultation process was, in effect, over.  Rather, it merely informed of the management company’s provisional intention subject to further consideration of any observations made in response to the notice.

Alexander Bastin acted for OM Property Management Ltd.