LON/00AK/LSC/2024/0060 — service charge decision
In LON/00AK/LSC/2024/0060, decided 5 March 2025, the First-tier Tribunal considered 12 disputed service charge items at Various flats, Geary Court, 24 The Concourse, Edmonton N9 0TQ and reached a mixed result: 3 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Various flats, Geary Court, 24 The Concourse, Edmonton N9 0TQ
Decision date: 5 March 2025
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Ashdown Phillips.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Management fees (2019-20) | £426.31 | £426.31 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2020-21) | £548.70 | £548.70 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2021-22) | £432.35 | £279.46 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2022-23) | £402.88 | £281.88 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Utilities (2019-20) | £309.91 | £309.91 | Allowed in full | — |
| Utilities (2020-21) | £253.88 | £253.88 | Allowed in full | — |
| Utilities (2021-22) | £529.37 | £529.37 | Allowed in full | — |
| Utilities (2022-23) | £497.92 | £497.92 | Allowed in full | — |
| Lifts (2019-20) | £489.75 | — | Reduced | Poor standard of work, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Lifts (2020-21) | £308.01 | £308.01 | Allowed in full | — |
| Lifts (2021-22) | £329.56 | £329.56 | Allowed in full | — |
| Lifts (2022-23) | £563.56 | £563.56 | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: partial.
Key passages (verbatim)
“As regards the first two years in dispute, we therefore confirm the figures of £426.31 and £548.70 per flat.”
“As regards the first two years in dispute, we therefore confirm the figures of £426.31 and £548.70 per flat.”
“we determine the figure due for 2021-22 is £279.46 per flat”
“we determine the figure due for 2021-22 is £279.46 per flat and for 2022-23 £281.88 per flat”
“In our judgment, L&Q followed a reasonable procurement system. The sums claimed are reasonable. We disallow nothing.”
“In our judgment, L&Q followed a reasonable procurement system. The sums claimed are reasonable. We disallow nothing.”
“there has been exceptionally bad communication by the landlord with its tenants. We have little doubt that, had there been proper engagement by the landlord, the current application could have been avoided.”
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.