There is now a clearer timetable for implementing important parts of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 in England.

The changes concern service-charge information, insurance charges and litigation costs. They will affect landlords and leaseholders alike, including resident management companies and right-to-manage companies.

It is important to distinguish these changes from the separate enfranchisement reforms. The government is not, through these regulations, implementing the abolition of marriage value or the other changes to lease-extension and freehold-purchase valuations, which remain under consideration following the closure of the valuation consultation.

Nor do these regulations remove the landlord’s existing statutory entitlement to reimbursement of reasonable legal and valuation costs incurred in dealing with a qualifying claim requiring it to grant a lease extension or sell its freehold to the flat owners. Those entitlements remain subject to the existing statutory rules and limits.

When do the changes take effect

On 6 November 2026, the relevant regulation-making powers commence. This allows the government to prescribe the detailed requirements; it does not immediately change service-charge demands or insurance charges.

The first substantive changes follow on 1 April 2027, including new information rights, changes to notices preserving recovery of service charges and the litigation-cost reforms.

From 1 November 2027, private-sector landlords will face new requirements concerning service-charge demands, accounts and annual reports. Insurance transparency requirements and administration-charge schedules also take effect at this stage.

The corresponding demand, accounting and annual-report requirements for social landlords follow on 1 November 2028.

Who should pay the legal costs

The litigation-cost reforms change the starting point for recovering a landlord’s costs through service charges or administration charges.

Under the present arrangements, the lease may permit recovery, subject to statutory protections and the court or tribunal’s powers. Under the new regime, recovery will generally require an appropriate order. Leaseholders will also gain a right to apply for a contribution towards their own litigation costs where that is just and equitable.

From a leaseholder’s perspective, this addresses a familiar concern: challenging a landlord’s position can expose them to paying towards the landlord’s legal bill as well as their own.

Landlords also have legitimate interests to protect. A landlord may reasonably need to incur legal costs to enforce lease obligations or defend an unfounded challenge. Restrictions on recovery may leave it bearing those costs even where its position is justified.

It would therefore be wrong to assume that every landlord seeking its costs is behaving unreasonably, just as it would be wrong to assume that every leaseholder’s challenge is justified.

Litigation costs and transaction costs are different

It is important not to confuse the litigation-cost changes with the separate reforms to a landlord’s non-litigation costs of dealing with a statutory claim, such as conveyancing and valuation fees.

Those separate reforms envisage each party generally bearing its own process costs, subject to exceptions. The commencement timetable discussed here does not itself bring that whole regime into operation.

If the separate enfranchisement process-cost reforms are implemented, landlords may have to meet substantial professional costs despite being required to grant a lease extension or sell their interest under the statutory scheme. That is a separate issue from the service-charge and litigation-cost timetable discussed above.

When might the enfranchisement reforms follow

The valuation consultation closed on 21 October 2026. The government must now consider the responses and decide the capitalisation and deferment rates to be prescribed. These rates will be important to the eventual premiums: the abolition of marriage value should not be considered in isolation from the rest of the calculation.

There is also a legislative hurdle. The government has said that technical defects in the 2024 Act must be corrected through further primary legislation before the amended enfranchisement scheme can commence. It intends to make those corrections through the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill, with further regulations needed to complete implementation.

There is therefore no confirmed commencement date for the new valuation scheme or the remaining package of enfranchisement changes. The April and November 2027 dates for service charges and litigation costs should not be read as a timetable for abolishing marriage value, introducing 990-year statutory extensions or changing entitlement to non-litigation process costs.

For leaseholders, waiting may bring a financial benefit, particularly where marriage value currently applies. It also carries risks: the lease continues to shorten, a sale or remortgage may be delayed, and the eventual premium will depend on the final valuation rules and rates. Where a lease is approaching 80 years, delay deserves particular care. Landlords likewise need to plan for uncertainty over the value of their interests and future cost recovery. Advice should be based on the individual property and objectives, rather than an assumed implementation date.

Existing disputes need particular care

The new litigation-cost rules will not apply to proceedings issued before 1 April 2027.

The issue date may therefore materially affect costs advice. That is a reason to review the position carefully, not to delay or accelerate proceedings without considering statutory deadlines, the merits and the wider consequences.

Nor do the changes make litigation risk-free for either side. Costs exposure will still depend on the proceedings, the applicable rules and the court or tribunal’s powers.

Preparing for the changes

Landlords and managing agents should begin reviewing their accounting systems, records and precedents. Leaseholder-controlled companies will also need to comply and should budget for the work involved.

Leaseholders should retain demands, accounts and correspondence so that concerns can be assessed against the evidence.

We act for both landlords and leaseholders. Our advice remains to establish the legal and financial position early, identify which costs can properly be recovered and explore agreement before a dispute becomes disproportionately expensive.

The reforms change the balance between the parties. Whether that produces a fair outcome will depend not only on the legislation, but on how it operates in practice.

Mark Vinall

Solicitor and Partner

Ashley Wilson Solicitors LLP