LON/00AK/LSC/2023/0347 — service charge decision
In LON/00AK/LSC/2023/0347, decided 14 May 2024, the First-tier Tribunal considered 6 disputed service charge items at 27 Eaton Park Road, London N13 4ED and reached a mixed result: 4 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 27 Eaton Park Road, London N13 4ED
Decision date: 14 May 2024
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2020-21) | £270 | £270 | Allowed in full | Demand formally invalid |
| Buildings insurance (2021-22) | £414.16 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Demand formally invalid |
| Buildings insurance (2022-23) | £496.10 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Demand formally invalid |
| Repairs & maintenance (2021-22) | £100 | £100 | Allowed in full | Demand formally invalid |
| Legal & professional costs (2021-22) | £1,000 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Demand formally invalid |
| Legal & professional costs (2022-23) | £2,643 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Demand formally invalid |
Key passages (verbatim)
“The tribunal finds the sum of £540 was paid to OCK Chartered Surveyors on 14 August 2020 for 'Taking client's instructions, inspecting property and preparing insurance valuation report.' The tribunal finds the respondent is liable to pay 50% (£270) of the sum incurred when it is validly demanded.”
“the applicant has failed to include the respondent's name on the insurance schedules for 2021/22 and 2022/2023 as required in default and therefore finds a 50% contribution to the premiums is not payable by the respondent.”
“the applicant has failed to include the respondent's name on the insurance schedules for 2021/22 and 2022/2023 as required in default and therefore finds a 50% contribution to the premiums is not payable by the respondent.”
“The tribunal finds the porch forms part of the demise granted to the respondent. However, clause 5(b) of the lease makes provision for the applicant landlord to carry out repairs and the respondent to contribute 50% of the cost of them. The tribunal finds that the respondent is liable for £100.”
“These costs are far too remote to be considered as incidental to the service of a notice. The tribunal also finds that the sums were incurred to claim service charges that were not yet payable.”
“These costs are far too remote to be considered as incidental to the service of a notice. The tribunal also finds that the sums were incurred to claim service charges that were not yet payable.”
“A hearing was held on 27 February 2024, which had to be adjourned due to the applicant's failure to provide a bundle of documents.”
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.