BIR/00CN/LIS/2021/0041-44 — service charge decision
In BIR/00CN/LIS/2021/0041-44, decided 5 September 2022, the First-tier Tribunal considered 9 disputed service charge items at 93, 95, 103 and 104 Rupert Street, Nechells, Birmingham and reached a mixed result: 1 item was reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 93, 95, 103 and 104 Rupert Street, Nechells, Birmingham
Decision date: 5 September 2022
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Sycamore Management (Nechells) No. 1 Ltd (self-managed; Sycamore Property Services used for maintenance).
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cleaning (2021-22) | £2,500 | £2,500 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2021-22) | £3,000 | £3,000 | Allowed in full | — |
| Gardening & grounds (2021-22) | £2,500 | £2,500 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2021-22) | £1,000 | £1,000 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2021-22) | £3,000 | £3,000 | Allowed in full | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2021-22) | £1,600 | £1,600 | Allowed in full | — |
| Utilities (2021-22) | £150 | £150 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2021-22) | £3,750 | £3,750 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2021-22) | £7,500 | — | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
Key passages (verbatim)
“Cleaning and Rubbish Removal £2,500.00 … the Tribunal finds that the following estimated costs … are reasonably incurred and reasonable in amount”
“Building Maintenance and Repairs £3,000.00 … reasonably incurred and reasonable in amount”
“Mowing Lawns and Gardening £2,500.00 … reasonably incurred and reasonable in amount”
“Painting and Decorating £1,000.00 … reasonably incurred and reasonable in amount”
“External Management £3,000.00 … in its experience, £3,000.00 is a reasonable estimate of the fee that may be payable to such an appointee”
“Accounts £600.00 … Legal Expenses £1,000.00 … reasonably incurred and reasonable in amount”
“The written evidence submitted by the parties is voluminous. On the Respondent's part, such volume could have been significantly lessened if he had been far more discerning and focused only on the presentation of evidence, whatever its nature, that was relevant to the resolution of the applications by the Tribunal - an apparently indiscriminate approach that was compounded by attempts to secure the admission of evidence otherwise than through the avenues prescribed by the Tribunal.”
“Neither of these practices is helpful to the Tribunal nor necessarily fair to the Applicant. They certainly do not enhance the Respondent's case.”
This summary is assembled from the structured record of the published decision; amounts appear only where the tribunal stated them. Always rely on the full decision itself.