LON/00AG/LSC/2024/0183 — service charge decision
In LON/00AG/LSC/2024/0183, decided 2 December 2024, the First-tier Tribunal considered 15 disputed service charge items at Flats A and B, 349A West End Lane, London, NW6 1LT and reached a mixed result: 13 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flats A and B, 349A West End Lane, London, NW6 1LT
Decision date: 2 December 2024
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Eagerstates.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2023/2024) | £108 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2023/2024) | £144 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Works not necessary |
| Other charges (2023/2024) | £480 | £480 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2023/2024) | £348 | £348 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2023/2024) | £588 | £294 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2023/2024) | £300 | £75 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2023/2024) | £390 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Poor standard of work |
| Other charges (2023/2024) | £198 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Works not necessary |
| Other charges (2023/2024) | £60 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2023/2024) | £102 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Works not necessary |
| Management fees (2023/2024) | — | — | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered, Not payable under the lease |
| Cleaning (2024/2025) | £600 | £300 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2024/2025) | £250 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Works not necessary, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2024/2025) | £200 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Works not necessary |
| Reserve fund contributions (2024/2025) | £2,000 | £1,000 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
Section 20C order: conditional.
Key passages (verbatim)
“no information has been provided about why the London Fire Prevention company were called out... the company have not carried out any assessment, prepared any reports or carried out any works”
“we do not consider the additional information materially improved fire safety. We also consider the existing poster was adequate for the building, making it unreasonable and disproportionate to incur the cost of a new poster.”
“We consider the amount charged is reasonable, and that it is good practice to have regular testing of this equipment to safeguard occupiers, visitors and the public.”
“An annual inspection and servicing of the fire alarm is good practice, and the cost incurred by the Respondent is reasonable for this work.”
“it is reasonable to clean guttering and downpipes once a year, but in our experience, twice a year is excessive and therefore unreasonable.”
“having regard to the small section of carpet this related to, and that in our judgment securing this section of the stair carpet was straightforward and would not take long to address, so we consider the £300 cost is unreasonable and excessive.”
“Despite the previous Tribunal's findings that there is no BNO board at the Property and the company engaged is not qualified, the Respondent has not addressed this when corresponding with the Applicants. Therefore, we have no explanation for the continued use of these contractors, to do work which we consider is unnecessary.”
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.