Q We live in a house converted into eight flats. The leaseholders have owned the freehold since the 1970s; the majority are now second-homers and have begun to press for cosmetic improvements. They cite a clause in our leases that permits charging the costs of “any special projects which may be agreed as desirable to the amenities of the premises by both the Lessor and the majority of the Lessees”. The specific current proposal is to renew the approach to some of the flats with granite cobbles, which will nearly double the service charge. Are there limits to expenditure on cosmetic improvements?

A The basic principle is always that the freeholder can recover only those service charges that are specifically allowed by the lease and that are permitted by landlord and tenant legislation. Whether the wording of your lease allows the landlord to recover the cost of the new paving is a matter of legal interpretation using the rules of construction adopted by the courts over many years.

For example, a lease that allows the freeholder to charge only for “repairs” will not generally include the cost of cosmetic improvements. But even this distinction can be confusing because almost any repair involves a degree of improvement. Lord Evershed once said that in the end it was up to a judge to take “the common-sense man-of-the-world view” about what was, and was not, a repair.

Your particular clause is very close to the wording of a lease that was considered by the High Court in the 1986 case of Mullaney v Maybourne Grange (Croydon) Management. The judge decided that low-maintenance windows (which replaced wooden leaky ones) were not “additional services or amenities” that the landlord could charge to the leaseholders. He decided that, in that particular lease, the word “amenity” meant something that was merely pleasant or pleasurable. This case tends to suggest that under your particular provision your landlords could recover the cost of fancy granite paving — whereas they might have more trouble recovering the cost of more functional repairs to the drive. Having said that, you really can’t hope to interpret the terms of any lease without looking at all its provisions rather than only one clause.

In any event, under Section 19 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord can recover only a reasonable level of costs. What’s more, if the work results in a charge of more than £250 per flat, the landlord will also have to go through the complex consultation and tendering procedures laid down by Section 20 of the Act.

The writer is a barrister at Tanfield Chambers. E-mail your questions to:

brief.encounter@thetimes.co.uk

Times recommends

• Second homes: credit crunch casualty or money-spinner?
• How I built my own sliding house
• Top 10 incentives for house buyers