Decision summary

LON/00AB/LSC/2021/0271 — service charge decision

In LON/00AB/LSC/2021/0271, decided 21 January 2022, the First-tier Tribunal considered 7 disputed service charge items at Flat A, 9 Oval Road, Dagenham, RM10 9DP and reached a mixed result: 7 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.

Property: Flat A, 9 Oval Road, Dagenham, RM10 9DP
Decision date: 21 January 2022
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK

Managing agent named in the decision: Eagerstates Limited.

What was challenged and what the tribunal decided

ItemDemandedAllowedOutcomeGrounds
Other charges (2018-19)£1,776.63£995.44ReducedLeaseholder evidence insufficient
Other charges (2019-20)£1,208.72£677.72ReducedLandlord could not evidence the cost
Major works (2019-20)£1,062£0Disallowed entirelyLandlord could not evidence the cost, Works not necessary
Administration charges (2018-19)£2,045£0Disallowed entirelyNot payable under the lease
Administration charges (2018-19)£3,600£0Disallowed entirelyOther grounds
Legal & professional costs (2018-19)£6,290£2,000ReducedCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Other charges (2019-20)£476.22£0Disallowed entirelyOther grounds

Key passages (verbatim)

“The tribunal finds that service charges for the period ending June 2019 are reasonable and payable by the respondent in the sum of £995.44.”
On other charges
“The tribunal finds that service charges for the period ending December 2019 in the sum of £677.72 to be reasonable and payable. This sum represents the half-yearly service charges claimed of £1,208.72 less 50% of £1,062.00 for meter cupboard works”
On other charges
“The tribunal finds these costs unsubstantiated … these notices were not provided to the tribunal, or any evidence of the works having been carried out”
On major works
“The tribunal finds the lease makes and no provision for the payments of such charges and therefore determines these sums are not payable by the respondent.”
On administration charges
“The tribunal finds these sums are not payable. If the applicant had wished to recover the costs of those proceedings, they should have sought the same in Claim No. D9QZ449J1.”
On administration charges
“The tribunal finds the costs claimed are out of all proportion to the sums initially claimed and to the sums recovered. Therefore, the tribunal limits the costs to £2,000”
On legal & professional costs
“The tribunal finds the costs claimed are out of all proportion to the sums initially claimed and to the sums recovered.”
Of Assethold Limited / Eagerstates Limited (applicant's costs claim)
“in light of the findings of the tribunal and the difficulties in deciphering the applicant's accounts and the sums properly charged, the tribunal makes no award of interest.”
Of Assethold Limited / Eagerstates Limited (applicant's accounts)
“£1,080 (inclusive of VAT) for Mr Gurvits costs although he is not legally qualified or produced any proof of loss.”
Of Eagerstates Limited

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.