Decision summary

CAM/00KG/LIS/2021/0018 — service charge decision

In CAM/00KG/LIS/2021/0018, decided 21 January 2022, the First-tier Tribunal considered 12 disputed service charge items at 78 Marine Court, Centurian Way, Purfleet on Thames and reached a mixed result: 9 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.

Property: 78 Marine Court, Centurian Way, Purfleet on Thames
Decision date: 21 January 2022
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK

Managing agent named in the decision: Thurrock Borough Council (Homeownership Services).

What was challenged and what the tribunal decided

ItemDemandedAllowedOutcomeGrounds
Lifts (2018-19)£10.38£0Disallowed entirelyNot payable under the lease
Other charges (2018-19)£4.95£0Disallowed entirelyNot payable under the lease
Lifts (2019-20)£8.57£0Disallowed entirelyNot payable under the lease
Other charges (2019-20)£4.76£0Disallowed entirelyNot payable under the lease
Lifts (2020-21)£8.57£0Disallowed entirelyNot payable under the lease
Other charges (2020-21)£4.76£0Disallowed entirelyNot payable under the lease
Staffing & concierge (2018-19)£603.24ReducedNot payable under the lease, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Staffing & concierge (2019-20)£624.04ReducedNot payable under the lease, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Staffing & concierge (2020-21)£790.76ReducedNot payable under the lease, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Management fees (2018-19)£232.21£232.21Allowed in full
Management fees (2019-20)£232.21£232.21Allowed in full
Management fees (2020-21)£232.21£232.21Allowed in full

Key passages (verbatim)

“The tribunal considers that the Applicant is not therefore liable under the lease in respect of costs and expenses incurred in relation to the 'entry door and lift services' in the common areas of her building at 43-62 Marine Court in respect of which she has no exercisable right of access.”
On lifts
“The Applicant is not therefore liable under the lease in respect of costs and expenses incurred in relation to the 'entry door and lift services' in the common areas of her building at 43-62 Marine Court.”
On other charges
“The Applicant is not therefore liable under the lease in respect of costs and expenses incurred in relation to the 'entry door and lift services' in the common areas of her building at 43-62 Marine Court.”
On lifts
“The tribunal determines that the Applicant is not liable to pay such charges.”
On lifts
“The tribunal determines that these sums are unreasonably high in that the caretaking costs of the common areas of the Applicant's building (43-62 Marine Court) should be 'stripped out'. The Respondent should recalculate the demands accordingly.”
On staffing & concierge
“The tribunal determines that these sums are unreasonably high in that the caretaking costs of the common areas of the Applicant's building (43-62 Marine Court) should be 'stripped out'.”
On staffing & concierge
“The failure to do so has made it more difficult and more time consuming for the tribunal to navigate the documents during the hearing, during deliberations and determinations and for the purpose of preparing the written decision. The tribunal has imposed no sanction on this occasion but instead has stressed the importance of complying with directions on any future occasion.”
Of Both parties (failure to comply with directions on bundle preparation)
“the Applicant's conduct as described is not unreasonable in the circumstances, including having regard to the less than full explanatory note to the service charge demands, and to the less than detailed explanatory narrative in the Respondent's statement of case and supporting statement filed in the proceedings.”
Of Respondent (inadequate explanatory notes and statement of 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.