Case No. UKUT-282-(LC)-UTLC-Case-Number:-LC-2022-117

57.It is open to the Tribunal to substitute its own decision, and it will be clear from what I have said that I take the view that the landlord followed a rational process in commissioning and following the Hydrock report, and that the outcome – setting the waking watch as an interim measure – was a reasonable one. Moreover, Hydrock recommended that that watch be put in place for both blocks, and since they are contiguous I take the view that it was reasonable to set up a watch for both. That cost was therefore reasonably incurred, subject to the assessment of the standard of service provided under section 19(1)(b).58.The FTT has already addressed that issue and has found that the quality was such that only half would be recoverable. Accordingly, the sum of £14,000 was reasonably incurred by the landlord within the meaning of section 19(1)(a).Upper Tribunal Judge Elizabeth Cooke2 November 2022