CHI/00HN/LSC/2020/0016 — service charge decision
In CHI/00HN/LSC/2020/0016, decided 2 June 2021, the First-tier Tribunal considered 4 disputed service charge items at Flat 9 Kernella Court, 51-53 Surrey Road, Bournemouth BH4 9HS and found largely for the landlord: 1 item was reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 9 Kernella Court, 51-53 Surrey Road, Bournemouth BH4 9HS
Decision date: 2 June 2021
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Initiative Property Management.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Major works (2019-2020) | £2,736.71 | £2,736.71 | Allowed in full | — |
| Administration charges (2020) | £60 | £60 | Allowed in full | — |
| Administration charges (2020) | £150 | £150 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2020) | £1,000 | — | Reduced | Not payable under the lease, Other grounds |
Section 20C order: refused.
Key passages (verbatim)
“It is the Tribunal's assessment that notices complied with section 20 of the Act.”
“the Tribunal finds that the Applicants are liable to pay the charges of £60 and £150 both in connection with the late payment of the service charge (paragraph 17 of the fifth schedule to the original lease).”
“the Tribunal finds that the Applicants are liable to pay the charges of £60 and £150 both in connection with the late payment of the service charge (paragraph 17 of the fifth schedule to the original lease).”
“Without this certificate, the Respondent has not strictly complied with the provisions of Clause 5 of the lease and therefore cannot increase the service charge.”
“Arguably the Respondent should have waited 30 days before issuing the third notice but as the Applicants are not challenging the choice of contractor, this is not relevant to this case.”
“it appears from the documentation that an Auditors certificate has not been obtained and sent to the Applicants. Without this certificate, the Respondent has not strictly complied with the provisions of Clause 5 of the lease and therefore cannot increase the service charge.”
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.