Decision summary

CHI/00MR/LSC/2023/0024 — service charge decision

In CHI/00MR/LSC/2023/0024, decided 5 December 2023, the First-tier Tribunal considered 14 disputed service charge items at 1-5 St Johns Mews, Victoria Grove, Southsea, Hampshire and reached a mixed result: 11 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.

Property: 1-5 St Johns Mews, Victoria Grove, Southsea, Hampshire
Decision date: 5 December 2023
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK

Managing agent named in the decision: Blue Property Management UK Ltd.

What was challenged and what the tribunal decided

ItemDemandedAllowedOutcomeGrounds
Gardening & grounds (2021)£638£0Disallowed entirelyNot payable under the lease
Legal & professional costs (2021)£544£544Allowed in full
Management fees (2021)£1,837£1,470ReducedCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Administration charges (2021)£24£0Disallowed entirelyCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Other charges (2021)£13£0Disallowed entirelyCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Other charges (2021)£1,170£0Disallowed entirelyLandlord could not evidence the cost
Cleaning (2022)£806£283.50ReducedNot payable under the lease, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Gardening & grounds (2022)£0£0Disallowed entirelyNot payable under the lease
Legal & professional costs (2022)£478£0Disallowed entirelyCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Landlord could not evidence the cost
Administration charges (2022)£12£0Disallowed entirelyCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Other charges (2022)£240£240Allowed in full
Other charges (2022)£240£240Allowed in full
Other charges (2022)£1,500£0Disallowed entirelyLandlord could not evidence the cost
Other charges (2022)£240£0Disallowed entirelyLandlord could not evidence the cost

Section 20C order: granted.

Key passages (verbatim)

“the fifth schedule to the lease, does not oblige the landlord to keep in good order repair and condition communal or common areas that are external to the building.”
On gardening & grounds
“the Tribunal determines that the sum of £544 for the production of the service charge accounts and the certification thereof has been reasonably incurred and forms part of the service charge payable by the Applicant of which his 1/5 share is £108.80.”
On legal & professional costs
“Those are fees not incurred during the service charge year ending 31 December 2021 and in the view of the Tribunal cannot be recovered as part of the service charges for that year.”
On management fees
“the Tribunal determines that the Respondent cannot recover a Client Money Protection charge of £24 as part of the service charge payable by the Applicant.”
On administration charges
“the Tribunal determines that this item cannot be recovered by the Respondent from the Applicant as part of the service charge payable by the Applicant.”
On other charges
“As the expense was not incurred it follows that it cannot [be recovered].”
On other charges
“In the view of the Tribunal the Respondent has not properly engaged in these proceedings not least by its failure to attend the hearing.”
Of Lisa Property Limited (Respondent)
“It was not in the view of the Tribunal acceptable for the managing agent to effectively dismiss that query by seeking to rely upon an argument of 'common practice'.”
Of Blue Property Management UK Ltd (managing agent)
“It is not clear to the Tribunal as to why if this item of expenditure was not in the event incurred it appears as an expense in the service charge accounts.”
Of Respondent / managing agent re Building Condition Report

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.