CHI/29UL/LSC/2023/0009 — service charge decision
In CHI/29UL/LSC/2023/0009, decided 18 July 2023, the First-tier Tribunal considered 8 disputed service charge items at Flat 3, 103 Victoria Grove (likely 16 Victoria Grove), Folkestone, Kent and reached a mixed result: 3 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 3, 103 Victoria Grove (likely 16 Victoria Grove), Folkestone, Kent
Decision date: 18 July 2023
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2016-2022) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2016-2022) | — | — | Allowed in full | Leaseholder evidence insufficient |
| Buildings insurance (2016-2022) | — | — | Allowed in full | Leaseholder evidence insufficient |
| Other charges (2016-2022) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Legal & professional costs (2023-24) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2018-19) | £722.39 | £685.79 | Reduced | Other grounds |
| Utilities (2022-23) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022-23) | £485 | £150 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
Section 20C order: refused.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the Tribunal determined that the accountancy costs for the service charge 2016-2022 service years were reasonable. The Tribunal was directed to the relevant invoices from the accountant and was satisfied that the sums invoiced were reasonable for the provision of such professional services.”
“The Tribunal was unpersuaded the Applicant had made out her case. There was simply no evidence, as opposed to assertion, that 0.7 pence in the pound was the going market rate for an economy of scale block purchased insurance policy.”
“terrorism cover is now sadly de rigueur for premises that have been converted to flats and is also industry standard outside of London or other big cities.”
“the Tribunal accepted the evidence of the Applicant as the submissions that they were always late was unsupported by any actual evidence and these items just appear as costs in the service charge amount but without any discernible paper trail.”
“the Tribunal determined that they were both recoverable and reasonable pending the conclusion of the set aside application yet to be heard in January 2024.”
“the Tribunal reduces the qualifying works for 2018-19 to £685.79 from £722.39 as this was the actual invoiced amount.”
“Despite the matter having had directions made on three separate occasions, the actual Statement of Case received from the Applicant dated 19 May 2023 is no more than his comments on the various items that are mentioned in the Scott Schedule. There are also attached various documents some of which relate to other legal proceedings.”
“even with the production of a written Skeleton Argument by the Applicant on the morning of the hearing, the Applicant has still not particularised matters in the detail that is required.”
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.