CHI/00HE/LIS/2021/0054 — service charge decision
In CHI/00HE/LIS/2021/0054, decided 10 November 2022, the First-tier Tribunal considered 6 disputed service charge items at Sawyers B and B (formerly known as Tom Sawyer's Tavern) Nailzee Point, Marine Drive Hannafore, West Looe, Cornwall and reached a mixed result: 1 item was reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Sawyers B and B (formerly known as Tom Sawyer's Tavern) Nailzee Point, Marine Drive Hannafore, West Looe, Cornwall
Decision date: 10 November 2022
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2020) | — | £2,486 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2021) | — | £3,026.80 | Reduced | Apportionment error |
| Other charges (2022) | — | £3,553.35 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2020) | — | — | Allowed in full | Leaseholder evidence insufficient |
| Repairs & maintenance (2021) | — | — | Allowed in full | Leaseholder evidence insufficient |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022) | — | — | Allowed in full | Leaseholder evidence insufficient |
Key passages (verbatim)
“The amount payable by the Respondents for interim service charges for the service year ending 31st December 2020 will be £2486.00 calculated by reference to 22% of the costs of the Applicant complying with its obligations under Parts I and II of the Third Schedule to the Lease”
“The amount payable by the Respondents for interim service charges for the service year ending 31st December 2021 will be £3026.80. This sum is calculated by reference to 22% of the costs of the Applicant complying with its obligations under Parts I and II of the Third Schedule to the Lease for the first six months and 24% of the said costs for the second six months”
“The amount payable by the Respondents for interim service charges for the service year ending 31st December 2022 will be £3553.35 calculated by reference to 24% of the costs of the Applicant complying with its obligations under Parts I and II of the Third Schedule to the Lease in that service charge year.”
“the Tribunal is unable to reach findings that the costs incurred by the Applicants for painting decorating repair maintenance or cleaning of the Estate for the service charge years in question were not reasonably incurred.”
“the Tribunal is unable to reach findings that the costs incurred by the Applicants for painting decorating repair maintenance or cleaning of the Estate for the service charge years in question were not reasonably incurred.”
“the Tribunal is unable to reach findings that the costs incurred by the Applicants for painting decorating repair maintenance or cleaning of the Estate for the service charge years in question were not reasonably incurred.”
“The absence of any witness statements or evidence of previous complaint before August 2022 was striking. These issues were of some importance to the Respondents and there had been an earlier hearing before Tribunal Judge Dobson in this application. Had there been a complete failure to clean or repair gutters, or a failure to maintain gutters at an earlier stage, the Tribunal would have expected to have seen some evidence of this.”
“The Respondents' failure to refer to those accounts or budgets or produce evidence of written requests for inspection, severely undermines the cogency of their challenge to the reasonableness of the service charges for the years in issue on this ground.”
“The Respondents' delay in providing details of its case challenging the surveyor's apportionment, failure to comply with directions timeously and failure to provide supporting evidence, contributed to the need for this dispute to be the subject of this determination and further delay in providing this determination.”
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.