LON/00AH/LSC/2021/0167 — service charge decision
In LON/00AH/LSC/2021/0167, decided 1 November 2021, the First-tier Tribunal considered 16 disputed service charge items at Flat 159, Vita Apartments, 1 Caithness Walk, Croydon and reached a mixed result: 3 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 159, Vita Apartments, 1 Caithness Walk, Croydon
Decision date: 1 November 2021
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: RMG.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gardening & grounds (2016-17 to 2020-21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2016-17 to 2020-21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Lifts (2016-17 to 2020-21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2016-17 to 2020-21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2016-17 to 2020-21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2016-17 to 2020-21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2016-17 to 2020-21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2016-17 to 2020-21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Utilities (2016-17 to 2020-21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2016-17 to 2020-21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2016-17 to 2020-21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2016-17 to 2020-21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2020-21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2020-21) | £1,300 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges (2021-22) | £5,736 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Other grounds |
| Management fees (2016-17 to 2020-21) | — | — | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered, Other grounds |
Section 20C order: partial.
Key passages (verbatim)
“The Applicant brought no evidence to show that this charge was unreasonable and bearing in mind that the tenants had not been charged at all for the first two years' maintenance, the Tribunal allows the sum in full.”
“The Applicant queried the insurance premiums for the property but brought no comparative evidence to demonstrate that they were unreasonable. The Tribunal therefore allows them in full.”
“Without comparative estimates the Tribunal has no evidence that the charges for this item were unreasonable and therefore deems them payable in full.”
“The Applicant has not effectively challenged the charges for the lift telephone which are therefore deemed to be payable in full.”
“in the light of Grenfell and without any specific evidence to the contrary, the Tribunal is reluctant to make a deduction from monies spent on fire precautions and equipment.”
“Since he made no allegation that the standard of cleaning was unsatisfactory the Tribunal has little alternative but to approve the costs in full as charged.”
“serving documents at the last minute was not acceptable, particularly when, as here, the Respondent was a professional landlord assisted by professional managing agents and with professional legal representation in these proceedings.”
“although it is barely credible as the actions of a competent managing agent.”
“the inconsistent method of presenting the accounts made it very difficult for the tenants properly to assess the level of charges being made and engendered mistrust.”
“They are responsible for the actions of their agent whose their level of service in this case fell below that to be expected of a reasonably competent manger.”
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.