LON/00AG/LSC/2021/0238 V:VHS — service charge decision
In LON/00AG/LSC/2021/0238 V:VHS, decided 9 February 2022, the First-tier Tribunal considered 8 disputed service charge items at Flat 2, 14 Priory Terrace, London NW6 4DH and found largely for the landlord: 1 item was reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 2, 14 Priory Terrace, London NW6 4DH
Decision date: 9 February 2022
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: 14 Priory Terrace RTM Co Ltd.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2020-21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2021-22) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2020-21) | £600 | £600 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2020-21) | £1,500 | £1,500 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2020-21) | £90 | £90 | Allowed in full | — |
| Administration charges (2020-21) | £85 | £85 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2021-22) | £325 | £325 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2019-20) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Other grounds |
Key passages (verbatim)
“the service charges demanded in respect of the period 25th March 2020 to 24th March 2021 are payable by the Respondent in full.”
“the estimated service charges demanded in respect of the period 25th March 2021 to 24th March 2022 are payable by the Respondent in full.”
“the Respondent has provided no evidence or expert opinion for his assertion that the accountant's fee did not need to be incurred, whereas Mr Weisz states (believably, in our view) that he has checked the position with a solicitor and with an accountant.”
“Mr Weisz's answer in relation to the work to the windows is persuasive, particularly in the absence of any evidence to back up the Respondent's assertion.”
“We are also satisfied with his answers regarding the £90 paid to Woodside Locksmith and the £85 paid for annual professional subscriptions.”
“this cost is covered either by the ability of the Applicant to recover 'the costs of and incidental to the performance of each and every covenant on the Lessor's part' (see clause 4(5)(b)) and/or by its ability to recover 'all fees charges and expenses payable to any solicitor accountant surveyor valuer or architect or other professional or competent adviser'”
“the service charge demands previously sent out by the Applicant were not compliant with relevant legislation, for example because they were not accompanied by a statement of leaseholders' rights and obligations.”
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.