LON/00AH/LSC/2023/0420 — service charge decision
In LON/00AH/LSC/2023/0420, decided 10 September 2024, the First-tier Tribunal considered 16 disputed service charge items at 11B and 13 Crowther Road, London, SE25 5QW and found largely for the leaseholder: 16 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 11B and 13 Crowther Road, London, SE25 5QW
Decision date: 10 September 2024
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: BLR Property Management Limited.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buildings insurance (2017-18) | £2,117.70 | £792.36 | Reduced | Insurance not market tested, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2017-18) | £646.90 | £300 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Buildings insurance (2018-19) | £2,166.06 | £831.98 | Reduced | Insurance not market tested, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2018-19) | £677 | £315 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Buildings insurance (2019-20) | £2,303.17 | £873.58 | Reduced | Insurance not market tested, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2019-20) | £668.85 | £330.74 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Buildings insurance (2020-21) | £2,050.81 | £917.26 | Reduced | Insurance not market tested, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2020-21) | £668.85 | £347.28 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Buildings insurance (2021-22) | £2,322.50 | £1,096.63 | Reduced | Insurance not market tested, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2021-22) | £753.08 | £364.46 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Buildings insurance (2022-23) | £2,639.91 | £1,125.30 | Reduced | Insurance not market tested, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2022-23) | £745.02 | £382.88 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Buildings insurance (2023-24) | £2,732.05 | £1,181.57 | Reduced | Insurance not market tested, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2023-24) | £811 | £402.02 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Buildings insurance (2024-25) | — | £1,240.65 | Reduced | Insurance not market tested, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2024-25) | — | £422.12 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“The Tribunal found that the insurance premiums were not reasonable. The sum insured was excessive and the insurance cover provided by the Respondent as part of their block policy was unsuitable for the Property.”
“The Tribunal found that the management fee was not reasonable given that the only service provided by the Respondent through their managing agents was dealing with insurance, collecting ground rent and service charges.”
“The Tribunal accepted that the quotations obtained by the Applicant showed that the insurance charged by the Respondent was excessive.”
“The Tribunal accepted the Applicants' analysis that the management fees in 2017 should have been £300 (£150 per flat) given the duties completed by the managing agent.”
“for the service charge year 2019 the landlord's insurance was provided by Covea at a cost of £2,303.17, whereas the Applicants' like for like quote from Covea was £1,235.76.”
“for the service charge year 2021, the landlord's insurance charge from Ageas was £2,322.50 whereas the Applicants' quotation from the same company was £1,163.58.”
“The Applicants were being charged a management fee and it would therefore be incumbent upon the Respondent to ensure that the insurance obtained for the Property was suitable.”
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.