Is there a presumption that the RPI is not applicable when negative?

• Thursday, 14 January 2010
• Kathleen Retourne
• 0 Comments

By law we understand the site owner can maintain the pitch fee until the Retail Prices Index (RPI) becomes positive, but this means a loss to residents as it has not been reduced. It also means that the site owner starts from a false base figure later on. Can the residents initiate the pitch fee review and reduce it by negative RPI? Or later when the site owner proposes a new pitch fee, can we disagree and reduce it by the negative percentage backdated to previous review date?
Are there any examples of the large site owners proposing new pitch fee reviews reduced by negative RPI? If so, it would give a strong indication that they believe a reduction should be given.
Is there a presumption that the RPI is not applicable when negative? If so, could this be argued under ‘relevant matters’?

Graham advises
Some park owners are ignoring the negative RPI and leaving pitch fees at the same level they are this year. Some have even concocted their own bizarre interpretations of the law to avoid reductions and maintain increases.
As you also point out, leaving the pitch fee unchanged is, in effect, a double abuse: if the pitch fee remains ‘as is' this year i.e. not reduced, assuming the increase is positive next year, the increase then will be on this year's unchanged level rather than the reduced level. Where the owner fails to reduce the pitch fee, the occupiers are faced with deciding whether to pursue the issue or not. It seems to me that the majority are grudgingly accepting a stationary pitch fee this year and living with it. Clearly, this is wrong and occupiers should be insisting the pitch fee is reduced. After all, the owners have been quick enough to increase pitch fees year-on-year.
The law is on the occupiers' side if they were to insist the fee is reduced.
I will not subscribe to the misconception that it is the ‘large site owners' who set the law by giving a ‘strong indication that they believe a reduction should be given'. The law applicable is the law of the land and that, at present, permits a fee ‘increase or decrease which is no more than an increase or decrease since the last review date'. I do not think the wording can be any clearer. There is no issue under ‘relevant matters'.
So far as timing is concerned, the time to write to the owner and demand a reduction, whatever it is, is on the review date or just after.