LON/00AG/LSC/2020/0073 — service charge decision
In LON/00AG/LSC/2020/0073, decided 23 November 2020, the First-tier Tribunal considered 11 disputed service charge items at 45/47 Endell Street, London, WC2H 9AJ and reached a mixed result: 8 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 45/47 Endell Street, London, WC2H 9AJ
Decision date: 23 November 2020
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Urang Property Management Ltd..
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Repairs & maintenance (2019) | £250 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2020) | £250 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2019) | £100 | £100 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2020) | £100 | £100 | Allowed in full | — |
| Administration charges (2019) | £10 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Duplication of charges, Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Administration charges (2020) | £10 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Duplication of charges, Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Utilities (2019) | £50 | £33.33 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2019) | £380 | £350 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Management fees (2020) | £410 | £350 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Other charges (2020) | £6.33 | £6.33 | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2020) | £15,372.51 | £14,372.51 | Reduced | Other grounds |
Section 20C order: partial.
Key passages (verbatim)
“it was not reasonable to make an additional charge of £750 in respect of drainage costs over and above the budgeted £1,000 per annum for general repairs. The actual cost of repairs in the past was negligible and there was nothing to suggest that this was likely to change significantly in the future.”
“the general repairs budget had remained the same and there was insufficient evidence to suggest that any significant increased demand on the budget was likely. It follows that the Tribunal concluded that the drainage item and the bank charges were not reasonable and not payable”
“The Tribunal therefore concluded that the sum of £100 per flat for fire safety equipment maintenance was reasonable and that the sum is payable.”
“the fire safety budget was reasonable and payable at the rate of £100 per flat”
“The Tribunal concluded that the imposition of this charge was not reasonable and agreed with the contention of the Applicants that any bank charges incurred should reasonably be expected to fall within the general management fee charged by the Respondents”
“the drainage item and the bank charges were not reasonable and not payable”
“He accepted that the property had no lift and there was no significant disrepair and that there was very low management input.”
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.