LON/00AN/LSC/2021/0115 — service charge decision
In LON/00AN/LSC/2021/0115, decided 2 August 2021, the First-tier Tribunal considered 7 disputed service charge items at 112 Askew Road, London W12 9BL and reached a mixed result: 5 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 112 Askew Road, London W12 9BL
Decision date: 2 August 2021
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Legal & professional costs (2019-2020) | £1,500 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Legal & professional costs (2019-2020) | £600 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges (2019-2020) | £150 | £75 | Reduced | Apportionment error, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2019-2020) | £235 | £235 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2019-2020) | £282.57 | £178.26 | Reduced | Apportionment error, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Buildings insurance (2020-2021) | £300 | £300 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2019-2020) | £37.50 | £18.75 | Reduced | Apportionment error, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the tribunal determines that the word hereunder limits the costs clause to the type of application anticipated in the clause, ie forfeiture proceedings and applications for recovery of sums payable by the Lessee and does not apply to an application for the Appointment of a Manager.”
“The tribunal does not consider that this charge is a valid service charge under the lease. Moreover the tribunal accepts the version of events provided by the applicants.”
“it is not reasonable for the applicants to pay costs relating to the commercial premises and Flat C when the respondent is directly benefitting from the commercial rent and the rent from the private residential tenant of Flat C.”
“the applicants have not provided any argument or evidence to suggest that the works were not carried out to a reasonable standard or any other reason to suggest that the charges are unreasonable.”
“The tribunal does not consider that it is reasonable for the applicants to bear more than one quarter of the insurance charges.”
“The applicants have not suggested that the estimate is unreasonable... The tribunal anticipates that the actual insurance charge per applicant will be lower and therefore the applicants will be credited with the difference.”
“The tribunal notes that the works were carried out by a close relative of the respondent.”
“the respondent was unwilling to make an application on his own behalf to sort out the issue of liability for service charges”
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.