BIR/00FY/LLD/2021/0003 — service charge decision
In BIR/00FY/LLD/2021/0003, decided 29 March 2022, the First-tier Tribunal considered 21 disputed service charge items at 6 and 7 Royal Court, Haydn Road, Nottingham and reached a mixed result: 11 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 6 and 7 Royal Court, Haydn Road, Nottingham
Decision date: 29 March 2022
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Blue Property Management UK Limited.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2009) | £840.08 | £840.08 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2010) | £1,153.34 | £1,042.62 | Reduced | Section 20B 18-month time limit |
| Repairs & maintenance (2010) | £630 | £360 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2011) | £952.75 | £952.75 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2012) | £1,297.33 | £577.27 | Reduced | Section 20B 18-month time limit, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2013) | £1,085 | £450 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2013) | £175 | £140 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2013) | £1,383.50 | £713.50 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2014) | £1,209.84 | £1,209.84 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2015) | £1,571.50 | £1,571.50 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2016) | £1,802.25 | £1,615 | Reduced | Section 20B 18-month time limit, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2016) | £81.25 | £18.75 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2017) | £1,481 | £1,481 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2018) | £1,525 | £1,525 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2019) | £1,432 | £1,357 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2019) | £3,240 | £3,240 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2020) | £1,406 | £1,406 | Allowed in full | — |
| Administration charges (2019) | £590 | £411.80 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Administration charges (2019) | £552.50 | £374.30 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Utilities (2009) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2009) | £920 | £920 | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: refused.
Key passages (verbatim)
“S/C year ending 31 Dec. 2009 – Electricity £1,479; Cleaning £920.00; Risk Assessment/HSE £240.00; Maintenance £1,057 – all determined at amounts claimed.”
“S20B costs conceded £1244.72/12 = 103.72 … 2010 – total costs deducted by Tribunal £103.72”
“Mr Marlow did concede that the charge for the doors should have been under the then applicable day rate of £150.00 plus vat for two operatives and agreed to reduce the charge to £300.00 plus VAT – (totalling £360.00)”
“S/C year ending 31 Dec. 2011 – all items allowed at amounts claimed.”
“S20B costs conceded £4,380.72/12 = … 2012 – total costs deducted by Tribunal £720.06”
“Mr Marlow conceded that the labour charges seemed high and he agreed to reduce the labour charge to £450.00 (i.e. the net day rate for three operatives).”
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.