Grateful for any views on this. I'm advising a pensioner in a leasehold (owner-occupied) sheltered scheme. She pays a service charge, the bulk of which is for 'maintenance for homeowners'. I think this is a reserve fund for future building maintenance, for things like external decoration etc which I don't think there would be a problem as eligible for PC. Most of this maintenance also relates to communal or external parts of the building.

The management company (actually a housing association) has just sent me a spreadsheet with a breakdown of the costings, listing all proposed works to be paid for from this fund up until 2058 (when we'll all probably be living on Mars anyway)! The major item listed for 2008/2009 expenditure is to replace all the central heating boilers in each property (they are responsible for this under the lease). Residents pay for their own fuel charges.

I have looked at the PC regs schedules (Sch II Para 13) to try and work out whether this would be an eligible service charge or not. A service charge relating to repairs and improvements to the dwelling would seem to be excluded,as are 'repairs' to an existing heating system but the notes to the regs suggest there might be some mileage in arguing that replacement is not a repair or improvement and so should be eligible as a service charge. Any views?

If this part of the service charge is going to be problematic, is there any scope in arguing:

a. the person has no choice but to agree to this work/charge as part of their lease, and/or
b. although the (proposed) replacement of the boilers is due to take place this coming financial year, the actual service charge for the reserve fund has been calculated on the basis of all the proposed work needed over the next 50 years and so all the later (eligible) costs should be included and the figure divided over 50 years?

I realise Friday afternoon is a bad time to be posting this type of question but I'm hoping someone else has come across this before and can get back to me and say "there's no need to worry because..."

If anyone can point me in the direction of the following 3 Commissioner's Decisions I would be grateful: CIS 667/2002; CIS 781/2002; CIS 15036/1996.

Many thanks.

CIS/15036/1996 is in rightsnet toolkit @

http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/toolkit_153-3108-17521.html

... and CIS/781/2002 is on the 'cmmrs' site @

http://www.administrativeappeals.tribunals.gov.uk/aspx/view.aspx?id=790

Thanks Shawn.