LON/00AG/LSC/2023/0324 & others — service charge decision
In LON/00AG/LSC/2023/0324 & others, decided 9 May 2024, the First-tier Tribunal considered 4 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: 9 May 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)) |
| Buildings insurance (2022) | — | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2021) | — | — | conceded | — |
| Administration charges (2021) | £3,494 | £3,093.47 | Reduced | — |
Section 20C order: partial.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the sums sought in respect of buildings insurance for both years were excessive and reduced them by approximately 50%”
“the sums sought in respect of buildings insurance for both years were excessive and reduced them by approximately 50%”
“the Second Applicant only agreed to bring the management fee in line with the tribunal's prior determination after service of the Respondent's statement of case in these proceedings”
“The First Applicant sought contractual interest in the sum of £3494 in respect of both flats. The Tribunal determined that the sum of £3,093.47 was due as interest under the terms of the leases.”
“it is clear that both the First and Second Applicants ignored its detailed determination as to the reasonableness of the service charges levied in particular in relation to management fees and buildings insurance for the years 2017-2020. It continued to levy charges which were completely at odds with the thrust of that decision with no clear justification.”
“we are perplexed as to how the First Applicant could have concluded that it was justified in charging interest on legal costs that had been disallowed by the tribunal in 2021.”
“the tribunal was unimpressed with the Respondent's attempt to re-open matters which it had previously conceded, and to raise new legal arguments in relation to the recoverability of interest on the evening of the hearing.”
“the Respondent's conduct in this matter has been poor. It failed to make any payment at all towards its ongoing liabilities for over 3 years.”
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.