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.”

“It has seemed throughout to be intent upon doing nothing more than the very barest minimum required of it and, as we have found so far as the service of a summary of rights and obligations is concerned, considerably less than that. That failure on the part of an experienced professional landlord and its agent is completely inexcusable, although it is unlikely that it contributed to any of the costs incurred by the Applicant in this case.”

“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.”

“Inexplicably, Scott Cohen have added their 'fixed fee' to their own invoice.”

“The invoice provided in relation to dealing with the claim notice details unnecessary and excessive work, for example 'scanning a copy of lease' and advance preparation for 'RTM takeover' where the RTM was contested. None of those costs are reasonable in the circumstances of this case.”

“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.”