LON/00AE/LSC/2021/0086 — service charge decision
In LON/00AE/LSC/2021/0086, decided 12 August 2021, the First-tier Tribunal considered 5 disputed service charge items at 61a High Street, London NW10 4NJ and reached a mixed result: 2 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 61a High Street, London NW10 4NJ
Decision date: 12 August 2021
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Major works (2018) | £5,970.75 | £5,095 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost, No Section 20 consultation |
| Buildings insurance (2020) | £400 | — | conceded | — |
| Other charges (2016-2019) | £2,074.05 | — | conceded | — |
| Ground-rent-adjacent charges (2020) | £150 | — | conceded | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2018) | £600 | — | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Not payable under the lease |
Section 20C order: refused. Section 20ZA dispensation: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the tribunal finds that the costs claimed by the applicant should be adjusted to reflect this absence of proof and the lack of explanation of legal costs”
“lack of explanation of legal costs, or why the respondent is required to 50% of these as opposed to the 1/3 share specified in the lease”
“Although, the applicant referred to a quotation of works from Bradford Watts dated 31 August 2018 and referred to in a letter to the respondent dated 6 September 2018, this was not included in the applicant's documents. The applicant also failed to provide the tribunal with a copy of any post works inspection by Black Consultancy and the invoices paid to Black Cat Consultants, Bradford Watts or BBS Law.”
“the tribunal does not accept that it was reasonable for the applicant to have delayed carrying out these works required under clause 8 of the lease, in the hope that the respondent would take on the responsibility for them as the obligation to carry out these works is clearly on the landlord.”
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.