LON/00AG/LSC/2023/0324 & others — service charge decision
In LON/00AG/LSC/2023/0324 & others, decided 21 March 2024, the First-tier Tribunal considered 5 disputed service charge items at Flats 2 and 3 Brunswick Mansions, London and reached a mixed result: 3 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flats 2 and 3 Brunswick Mansions, London
Decision date: 21 March 2024
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Brunswick Mansions Management Company Ltd.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buildings insurance (2021) | — | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Insurance not market tested |
| Buildings insurance (2022) | — | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Insurance not market tested |
| Buildings insurance (2023) | £25,000 | £7,238.30 | conceded | — |
| Management fees (2021-2023) | — | £960.24 | conceded | — |
| Administration charges (2020-2023) | — | £3,096.14 | Reduced | Other grounds |
Key passages (verbatim)
“Doing the best we can, and having regard to our expertise as an specialist tribunal, we consider that the sum of £14,400 per annum would be reasonable for the years 2021 and 2022.”
“Doing the best we can, and having regard to our expertise as an specialist tribunal, we consider that the sum of £14,400 per annum would be reasonable for the years 2021 and 2022.”
“They accepted that the sum of £7238.30 would be reasonable for buildings insurance for the year 2023.”
“the Applicants agreed … to reduce the charge for management fees for the years 2021-2023 to a total of £960.24 per annum for both flats. This was the sum that the tribunal previously determined would have been reasonable for the year 2020.”
“The total interest due on the applicable credit from 6 December 2021 to 15 August 2023 is £719.35. The accounts had already been credited with the sum of £318.25 and therefore the amount of interest due has to be reduced by a further £401.10, giving a final figure of £3,093.47.”
“It is unfortunate that Mr Gupta did not consider seeking alternative quotes from a different broker earlier than he did, particularly in the light of the striking difference between the determination of the tribunal for the year 2020 and the cost of building insurance, purchased again through its original broker, for 2021 and 2022. The tribunal considers that the first Applicant could and should have done this for the years 2021 and 2022.”
“It is true that the schedule in the bundle is not as clear as it could be.”
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.