CHI/45UC/LSC/2022/0041 & others — service charge decision
In CHI/45UC/LSC/2022/0041 & others, decided 21 March 2023, the First-tier Tribunal considered 5 disputed service charge items at Flats 1-3, 23 Upper Bognor Road, Bognor Regis, West Sussex and found largely for the leaseholder: 3 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flats 1-3, 23 Upper Bognor Road, Bognor Regis, West Sussex
Decision date: 21 March 2023
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Eagerstates Ltd.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2020-21) | £4,304.64 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Works not necessary, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Cleaning (2020-21) | £840 | £840 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2020-21) | £2,263.40 | £2,263.40 | Allowed in full | — |
| Administration charges (2020-21) | £360 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Other grounds |
| Other charges (2020-21) | £36 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the fire safety works in the sum of £4,304.64, which the Respondent accepted had not been carried out and to which no commitment had been made and this was removed from their final final account.”
“The Applicant accepted the cleaning costs of £840 as they had been provided with invoices and they were prepared to accept the amount claimed for insurance.”
“they were prepared to accept the amount claimed for insurance.”
“The Respondent had not provided any invoice to support this sum. It is not clear how it was arrived at and the Tribunal was told that the handover was far from helpful and was incomplete.”
“No information had been provided as to what this was for and no invoices had been provided.”
“The failure by the Respondent to comply with directions was to say the least unfortunate, if not a slight to the Tribunal and the Applicant.”
“Unfortunately what eventually arrived bore no relation to the documents described at the directions hearing. There was no bank statement for the general client account, there were no spreadsheets.”
“neither final account summary provided any account for either interest that had accrued given that sums are paid in advance or any balance on the account carried over from previous years.”
“indeed no sums had been paid over under s.94 despite the Respondent accepting that £477.58 was due.”
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.