LON/00AA/LSC/2024/0018 — service charge decision
In LON/00AA/LSC/2024/0018, decided 1 August 2024, the First-tier Tribunal considered 7 disputed service charge items at Flat 333, Lauderdale Tower, Barbican, London EC2Y 8NA and reached a mixed result: 3 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 333, Lauderdale Tower, Barbican, London EC2Y 8NA
Decision date: 1 August 2024
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Staffing & concierge (2017-2018 to 2023-2024) | £1,718 | £700 | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation |
| Staffing & concierge (2017-2018 to 2022-2023) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Staffing & concierge (2020-2021) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2017-2018 to 2022-2023) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2023-2024) | £472,337 | £300,000 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2018-2019 to 2021-2022) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2017-2018 to 2023-2024) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
Section 20C order: refused.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the sum that can be recovered from the Applicant in respect of the Hayes contract for the years 2017-2018 to 2023-2024 is capped at £700”
“the cost of engaging temporary porters via the Hayes contract is recoverable under paragraph 8 and there is no need to consider the effect of the sweeper clause at paragraph 10”
“the cost of engaging agency staff to cover for 4 members of the porter staff who were permitted to stay at home from March 2020 to September 2020 was both reasonably incurred and recoverable under the terms of the Applicant's lease”
“There is in our view no evidence to show that the sums spent on cleaning overall, or the sums spent on temporary staff from 2017-2018 to 2022-2023 were unreasonable in amount.”
“based on the available evidence a reasonable amount would be £300,000. This is based on the sums spent in 2022-2023 with an allowance for wage and services inflation.”
“the cost of the same was recoverable both under the lease and was reasonably incurred within the meaning of s.19 of the 1985 Act.”
“We did not consider that this was a good reason for late service, particularly as Mr Tomkins is acting in person.”
“The Respondent has been aware of this issue since 2021 but to date has failed either to repay the sums charged to the leaseholders attributable to the Hayes contract which exceeds the cap, or to pursue an application for retrospective dispensation.”
“We have had no explanation from the Respondent as to why the estimated cost of agency cleaners has gone up so much while the cost of permanent staff has presumably not reduced. Even making due allowance for wage increases between 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 it is difficult to see how a near doubling of the cost could be justified.”
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.