LON/00AK/LSC/2022/0152 — service charge decision
In LON/00AK/LSC/2022/0152, decided 2 February 2023, the First-tier Tribunal considered 13 disputed service charge items at Flat 4, Boulevard House, 42 Elmore Road, Enfield, Middlesex and reached a mixed result: 5 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 4, Boulevard House, 42 Elmore Road, Enfield, Middlesex
Decision date: 2 February 2023
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: HML Property Management (appointed during proceedings).
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2021-22) | £550 | £550 | Allowed in full | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2021-22) | £145 | £145 | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2021-22) | £480 | £80 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Utilities (2021-22) | £537 | £300 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2021-22) | £326 | £326 | Allowed in full | — |
| Gardening & grounds (2021-22) | £390 | £195 | Reduced | Other grounds |
| Repairs & maintenance (2021-22) | £1,054 | £0 | conceded | Other grounds |
| Management fees (2021-22) | £1,848 | £924 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered, No Section 21B summary of rights, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Buildings insurance (2021-22) | £2,240.83 | £2,240.83 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2021-22) | £257.80 | £257.80 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2021-22) | £100 | £100 | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2021-22) | £360 | £100 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Administration charges (2021-22) | £100 | £0 | conceded | Other grounds |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“£550 payable subject to paragraph 9 of our decision”
“£145.50 payable”
“given the lack of evidence on the part of the Respondents to show the attendances we find that the sum of £80 is a reasonable amount to order as payable in these circumstances.”
“The budgeted figure of £300 is accepted by the Respondents to cover the electricity for the period until 28th February 2022 and we find that to be a fair sum in the circumstances, given the lack of information forthcoming from the Respondent in respect of the outstanding balance charge.”
“£326 payable”
“£195 payable as agreed between the parties”
“There is no doubt that the Respondent has not fulfilled its duties as a managing agent as one would expect. The demands that have been issued in this case are faulty.”
“This means that the complaints made by Mr Ahmed that the tenants had not paid is somewhat disingenuous given the lack of proper demands in this case.”
“there was no evidence that any monitoring of those people providing services to the Property was being undertaken. No certificate of the accounts has been produced and generally the Respondent has fallen far short of its obligations under the terms of the lease and as a manager of the Property.”
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.