Decision summary

LON/00AM/LSC/2020/0071 — service charge decision

In LON/00AM/LSC/2020/0071, decided 26 March 2021, the First-tier Tribunal considered 19 disputed service charge items at Basement Flat and Flat 120A, 120 Nevill Road, London N16 0SX and reached a mixed result: 11 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.

Property: Basement Flat and Flat 120A, 120 Nevill Road, London N16 0SX
Decision date: 26 March 2021
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK

Managing agent named in the decision: Remus Management.

What was challenged and what the tribunal decided

ItemDemandedAllowedOutcomeGrounds
Buildings insurance (2010-2019)Allowed in full
Other charges (2013-14)£438£438Allowed in full
Reserve fund contributions (2010-2019)Allowed in full
Repairs & maintenance (2010-11)£360£250ReducedCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Repairs & maintenance (2011-12)£300£300Allowed in full
Repairs & maintenance (2012-13)£378£250ReducedCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Repairs & maintenance (2013-14)£500£250ReducedCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Repairs & maintenance (2014-15)£500£250ReducedCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Repairs & maintenance (2015-16)£500£250ReducedCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Repairs & maintenance (2016-17)£500£250ReducedCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Repairs & maintenance (2017-18)£500£250ReducedCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Repairs & maintenance (2018-19)£500£500Allowed in full
Legal & professional costs (2010-2019)ReducedCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Standard not reasonable (s19(1)(b))
Legal & professional costs (2013-14)Allowed in full
Management fees (2010-2019)ReducedFee excessive for service delivered, Duplication of charges
Major works (2014-15)£924£550ReducedCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Major works (2014-15)£474£474Allowed in full
Major works (2015-16)£900.90£900.90Allowed in full
Major works (2016-17)£1,637.10£779.10ReducedCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))

Section 20C order: refused.

Key passages (verbatim)

“Considered in the round, we cannot conclude that the insurance charges are unreasonable.”
On buildings insurance
“the charge for reinstatement surveys was reasonably incurred.”
On other charges
“The service charge demands relating to the effective building up of a reserve fund (as per clause 2(2)(b)(ii) of the lease) were reasonable.”
On reserve fund contributions
“In respect of the service charge years 2010/11 and 2012/13 to 2017/18, the service charge demands referable to general repairs were not reasonable. In each of those years, a reasonable demand would have been £250.”
On repairs & maintenance
“It would be pointless to make a finding in respect of 2011/12, when the budgeted figure was, in fact, spent.”
On repairs & maintenance
“In respect of the service charge years 2010/11 and 2012/13 to 2017/18, the service charge demands referable to general repairs were not reasonable. In each of those years, a reasonable demand would have been £250.”
On repairs & maintenance

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.