LON/00AH/LSC/2020/0061 — service charge decision
In LON/00AH/LSC/2020/0061, decided 6 July 2021, the First-tier Tribunal considered 8 disputed service charge items at Flats at The Red House, 269 Sanderstead Road, South Croydon and reached a mixed result: 4 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flats at The Red House, 269 Sanderstead Road, South Croydon
Decision date: 6 July 2021
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2018) | £1,440 | £1,440 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2019) | £6,058.18 | £4,344.38 | Reduced | Insurance not market tested, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Cleaning (2019) | £339.80 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Other grounds |
| Gardening & grounds (2019) | £176.40 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Other grounds |
| Lifts (2019) | £653.43 | £653.43 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2019) | £180 | £180 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2019) | £1,260.91 | £1,260.91 | Allowed in full | — |
| Administration charges (2019) | £120 | £60 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
Section 20C order: partial.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the Tribunal took the view that the charges were payable by the leaseholders and at the hourly rate mentioned they were also reasonable. Therefore, the Tribunal determines that these surveyors' fees are payable and reasonable.”
“the Tribunal was of the view that the level of the premium charged by the landlord was excessive and that the level should be at the higher of the two alternative quotes from the other reputable insurers, at £4344.38 set by Zurich.”
“The respondent would have had a substantial period of notice before the RTM came into operation sufficient therefore to enable the landlord to make arrangements to stop the charges on or before the RTM took over responsibility for the property. In these circumstances the Tribunal disallows both these amounts.”
“The respondent would have had a substantial period of notice before the RTM came into operation sufficient therefore to enable the landlord to make arrangements to stop the charges on or before the RTM took over responsibility for the property. In these circumstances the Tribunal disallows both these amounts.”
“the Tribunal was satisfied that they were properly payable by the tenants. Additionally, in the absence of any convincing evidence from the applicants the Tribunal was satisfied that the charges were reasonable and so payable.”
“the Tribunal took the view that the charges were payable by the leaseholders and were also reasonable. Therefore, the Tribunal determines that these fees are payable and reasonable.”
“It was apparent to the Tribunal and admitted by the applicant that the issue had not been raised in the application or indeed in the applicant's statement of case. The Tribunal must be mindful of the provisions of Rule 3 of the Tribunal Rules ... that states that the overriding objective of these Rules is to enable the Tribunal to deal with cases fairly and justly. It was clear to the Tribunal that this very late issue raised by the applicant could clearly lead to unfairness.”
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.