CHI/00ML/LIS/2020/0035 — service charge decision
In CHI/00ML/LIS/2020/0035, decided 8 April 2021, the First-tier Tribunal considered 20 disputed service charge items at Flats 4 and 5, 32 Brunswick Square, Hove, East Sussex and found largely for the landlord: 1 item was reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flats 4 and 5, 32 Brunswick Square, Hove, East Sussex
Decision date: 8 April 2021
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Pepper Fox Limited (from Nov 2016); previously The Property Shop.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Management fees (2014) | £1,692 | £1,692 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2015) | £1,692 | £1,692 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2016) | £1,692 | £1,692 | Allowed in full | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2016) | £1,796.80 | £1,796.80 | Allowed in full | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2017) | £2,874 | £2,874 | Allowed in full | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2018) | £290.16 | £290.16 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2014) | £180 | £180 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2015) | £180 | £180 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2016) | £180 | £180 | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2015) | £3,500 | £3,500 | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2016) | £11,200 | £11,200 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2016) | £900 | £900 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2017) | £3,081.60 | £500 | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation |
| Repairs & maintenance (2017) | £5,028 | £5,028 | conceded | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2018) | £950 | £950 | conceded | — |
| Other charges (2018) | £150 | £150 | conceded | — |
| Management fees (2017) | £1,099.08 | £1,099.08 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2018) | £1,554 | £1,554 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2018) | £1,428.75 | £1,428.75 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2019) | £31,655 | £31,655 | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: refused.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the management fees as set out in the certified accounts for the said years were reasonably incurred”
“the management fees as set out in the certified accounts for the said years were reasonably incurred”
“the management fees as set out in the certified accounts for the said years were reasonably incurred”
“the Tribunal is satisfied that the legal costs incurred by the Applicant were reasonably incurred and are recoverable as part of the service charge”
“the Tribunal is satisfied that the legal costs incurred by the Applicant were reasonably incurred and are recoverable as part of the service charge”
“the Tribunal is satisfied that the legal costs incurred by the Applicant were reasonably incurred and are recoverable as part of the service charge”
“The management may not have been perfect (for example, the historic failure to arrange for the service charge accounts to be certified by a Chartered Accountant).”
“That historically that has not happened.”
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.