LON/00AM/LSC/2025/0872 — service charge decision
In LON/00AM/LSC/2025/0872, decided 20 January 2026, the First-tier Tribunal considered 9 disputed service charge items at Flat 2, 42-44 DeBeauvoir Crescent, London N1 5SB and reached a mixed result: 2 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 2, 42-44 DeBeauvoir Crescent, London N1 5SB
Decision date: 20 January 2026
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Daniel Watney LLP.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Legal & professional costs (2023) | £8,634 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Major works (2023) | £43,799 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Management fees (2023) | £13,694 | £13,694 | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2022) | £6,963 | £6,963 | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2023) | £5,431 | £5,431 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2022) | £9,582 | £9,582 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2023) | £7,963 | £7,963 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022) | £1,418 | £1,418 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2023) | £7,917 | £7,917 | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the tribunal found that the Respondent failed to rebut the Applicant's prima facie case because it brought no documentary evidence whatsoever in support of the work allegedly carried out, or to explain how these professional fees were incurred.”
“the tribunal found that the Respondent failed to rebut the Applicant's prima facie case because it provided no documentary evidence whatsoever to demonstrate the work done, or to explain how or why these professional fees were incurred for roof works which did not go ahead.”
“The tribunal does not find that the Applicant has made out a prima facie case that the service charges for management and related costs are not reasonably incurred.”
“The tribunal does not find that the Applicant has made out a prima facie case that the service charges for cleaning and environmental charges are unreasonable.”
“The tribunal does not find that the Applicant has made out a prima facie case that the service charges for cleaning and environmental charges are unreasonable.”
“The tribunal does not find that the Applicant has made out a prima facie case that the service charges for fire safety are unreasonable.”
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.