CAM/00ME/LSC/2022/0027 — service charge decision
In CAM/00ME/LSC/2022/0027, decided 1 March 2023, the First-tier Tribunal considered 14 disputed service charge items at Charters Mansion, Charters Road, Ascot, Berkshire and reached a mixed result: 8 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Charters Mansion, Charters Road, Ascot, Berkshire
Decision date: 1 March 2023
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Mrs Sharon Wild (estate manager from April 2020).
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Major works (2020) | £21,944.58 | £21,944.58 | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2020) | £8,911.02 | £8,911.02 | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2020) | £5,880 | £5,880 | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2019-20) | £48,840 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2018) | £2,469 | £0 | conceded | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2020) | £220 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2020) | £1,020 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2020) | £1,774.14 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Repairs & maintenance (2020) | £6,363 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2020) | £2,244 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Major works (2020) | £11,852.40 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Not payable under the lease |
| Major works (2020) | £50,400 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges (2020) | £732 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Repairs & maintenance (2020) | £22,800 | £0 | Withdrawn | — |
Section 20C order: granted. Section 20ZA dispensation: partial.
Key passages (verbatim)
“Our findings are that the costs associated with the LR Services in the sum of £21,944.50 and £8,911.02 are properly payable and are indeed accepted as such by Mr Edwards.”
“The next invoice is dated 20th April with LR Services in the sum of £8,911.02; again this is not disputed as being payable by Mr Edwards.”
“Insofar as the scaffolding is concerned, we accept the figure of £5,880 by Agile Scaffolding.”
“In respect of the balance of the scaffolding costs, we consider that Mr Edwards should make his contribution to those as a balancing charge.”
“It is not necessary for us to make a determination in connection with the claim for professional fees in 2018 of £2,469 as the Respondent has conceded that those are not recoverable.”
“The next invoice on the schedule is Smart Properties in the sum of £220 said to be dated 6th March 2020 for roof leaks but no explanation is given and indeed we cannot find a copy of that invoice.”
“The first thing we should say is that we express surprise that the Respondents called no live evidence. Although Mrs Wild had tendered a witness statement, she was not really able to assist us, the more so as of course she was unwell and could not finish the hearing. In any event her evidence was limited to the production of invoices and an assertion that the Respondent's statement of case was true to the best of her knowledge and belief and that its contents were adopted. This was a somewhat strange assertion to make as she was not at the Property at the time these issues arose. Furthermore, the invoices exhibited that are said to be relevant to the works under the application are limited.”
“We are therefore surprised that a member of SAPC was not called to give evidence and also that Mr Gray, who appears to have been a major player in this matter, did not provide any evidence to assist us in our determination. In addition, the documentation is in part lacking and is difficult to find. The index of the bundle is unhelpful, for example the witness statement of Sharon Wild is recorded with exhibit SW1. There are, however, a number of other exhibits that appear within the 120 pages which appear to govern the extent of her evidence. In addition, we were not provided with a copy of the apartment 6 lease but just a variation thereto.”
“It then appears that Mr Gray, on what authority we do not know, asked them to leave and that he would finish it. He finished these works using his own business. We find that somewhat surprising and suggests to us a lack of control by the directors of the Respondent Company.”
“doing the best we can given the nature of the documentation before us and the somewhat unhelpful layout of the bundle”
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.