CHI/00MW/LSC/2024/0106 — service charge decision
In CHI/00MW/LSC/2024/0106, decided 16 January 2025, the First-tier Tribunal considered 6 disputed service charge items at 78 Sylvan Drive, Newport, IOW and found largely for the leaseholder: 5 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 78 Sylvan Drive, Newport, IOW
Decision date: 16 January 2025
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Property Fusion Limited.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Management fees (2020-23) | — | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Management fees (2020-23) | — | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2020-23) | — | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Buildings insurance (2020-23) | — | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Administration charges (2020-23) | — | £0 | conceded | Demand formally invalid |
| Legal & professional costs (2020-23) | £1,080 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Demand formally invalid, Not payable under the lease |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“The estimated service charges which have been demanded have not been demanded in accordance with the requirements of the Lease. That is entirely clear to the Tribunal.”
“the Tribunal was not in receipt of any management agreement from the managing agents, as Ms Dawe accepted. The Tribunal found that rather surprising.”
“the Tribunal was not prepared to allow a separate, albeit modest, additional charge for what appeared at first blush to be a normal management activity usually included in normal management fees.”
“The Tribunal finds that the estimated service charges were not reasonable insofar as they exceeded the actual cost of the insurance by at most 10%.”
“Mr Jones conceded that such other charges had not been demanded and so could not properly be claimed as administration charges.”
“The Court holds that none of the legal costs claimed as part of the substantive claim were owing and due. The part of the claim which relates to them also fails.”
“Rather there has been a substantial failure to identify the requirements of the Lease and to follow it. It is indeed difficult to see that the Lease has ever been properly considered at all prior to the hearing.”
“Ms Dawe in her witness statement made what was in the circumstances a rather bold assertion that the agent abides by the Lease. As explained above, that was patently incorrect.”
“It is at least difficult to envisage them having done and so the Applicant continuing with a claim without any reference to the actual terms of the Lease.”
“The Particulars of Claim rather unhelpfully states that the Applicant relies on the Lease generally for its full terms and effect. It does not identify any specific provisions within the Lease as it might be expected to do. That is at least unsatisfactory.”
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.