CHI/00HB/LBC/2020/0033 — service charge decision
In CHI/00HB/LBC/2020/0033, decided 7 June 2021, the First-tier Tribunal considered 15 disputed service charge items at First Floor Flat, 271 Gloucester Road, Bishopston, Bristol and reached a mixed result: 10 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: First Floor Flat, 271 Gloucester Road, Bishopston, Bristol
Decision date: 7 June 2021
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Demand formally invalid |
| Buildings insurance | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Other grounds |
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Administration charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
Key passages (verbatim)
“we were not satisfied on a balance of probabilities that the Applicant had proved a breach of the lease by the Respondent under this heading.”
“The Tribunal does not accept on a balance of probabilities that the Applicant has proved that the Respondent is in breach. The video was not shown as evidence.”
“The Tribunal finds that the Applicant has confused the rent reserved under the lease with the Ground Rent Charge levied by a third party Shenstone Properties Ltd.”
“The Tribunal finds that the ceiling joists are not part of the flat as defined in the Second Schedule (a)… The Tribunal finds that this is a breach of Schedule 4.3 of the lease.”
“the lintels supporting the wall openings are not [within the demise]. The works were necessary and, on the evidence, urgent, but the carrying out of the works without consent constitutes a breach of the lease.”
“The Tribunal finds that the Applicant has not proved on a balance of probabilities that the Respondent has breached the lease as alleged.”
“The Tribunal finds that the Applicant himself made detailed and lengthy statements to the insurers which, at the time, were unproven allegations. This led to the response from insurers.”
“The Applicant confirmed that he had not completed accounts for the last eight years and no accounts had been submitted.”
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.