Eagerstates Ltd — tribunal record

“The Respondent failed to do so. Their managing agents (Eagerstates Ltd) said the dispute related to arrears showing on the account when they had taken over management of the Property.”

“Despite the repeated directions and further prompt the day before the hearing, the Respondent had failed to produce a copy.”

“the Respondent's failure to comply with repeated directions has taken up a disproportionate share of the tribunal's resources and has meant that less can be determined in this decision than might otherwise have been possible.”

“The Respondent confirmed receipt of this bundle and also accepted that the Respondent had not provided the Applicant or the Tribunal with any documents in accordance with the Tribunal's directions.”

“The Tribunal was not presented with any evidence to explain why Aquevo then completed work on the public pavement to the surface manhole.”

“the limited information given to the leaseholders by the Respondent or its managing agents was of poor quality, incomplete and not reconciled, as required of the Respondent under the leases.”

“The statement headed 'December 2022 – handover' with a breakdown totalling £16,491.88 was undated and did not state the precise period covered. It was plainly not the entirety of 2022, but the Respondent/Eagerstates Limited had made no attempt to reconcile it with the estimated charges for 2022 i.e., the original budget.”

“notices under section 146 of the Law of Property Act 1925 were sent to the Applicant by Eagerstates Limited themselves, and not by solicitors. This in our judgment calls into question whether the files relating to the Flats were ever sent to solicitors at all.”

“The invoice provided by the Respondent at page 47 of the Bundle is unclear. It is titled "tax invoice" however the description of the work is stated as: "call out to the above property on 01/03/22 to carry out the Standard Audit Report. Found landlord supply present; please find attached confirmation of meter reading". The Tribunal is therefore not satisfied that this invoice is an invoice for an "annual accountants' certification" which verified service charge accounts. On the basis of the information before the Tribunal, the Tribunal is not satisfied that this work was completed and, consequently, finds that this amount is not payable.”

“The Respondent was not present and so the Tribunal waited until 10.15am. When the hearing reconvened, the Respondent was still not present.”

“We record that the response to these proceedings by the Respondent was very limited and contained little proper explanation of the sums claimed. Certainly the Respondents statement fell below the information we would typically expect to receive in response to such an application.”

“In our judgment the Respondent acting through its agents has been dismissive of the same and has acted to lengthen the proceedings. The procedural history makes this very plain.”