LON/00AN/LSC/2021/0249 — service charge decision
In LON/00AN/LSC/2021/0249, decided 4 January 2022, the First-tier Tribunal considered 4 disputed service charge items at Flat 19 Westside, Ravenscourt Park, London, W6 0TY and found largely for the landlord: 2 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 19 Westside, Ravenscourt Park, London, W6 0TY
Decision date: 4 January 2022
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Regents Letting & Property Management Limited (Regent Property).
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2020-21) | £2,820 | £2,820 | Allowed in full | — |
| Administration charges (2020-21) | £90 | £90 | Allowed in full | — |
| Administration charges (2020-21) | £250 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Demand formally invalid |
| Legal & professional costs (2020-21) | £7,294.40 | £6,000 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
Key passages (verbatim)
“The Respondent did not challenge any of the items included in the budget. Neither did he suggest that the budget was too high… the Tribunal is therefore satisfied that service charges of £2,820 are payable.”
“The Tribunal is satisfied that this sum is payable and reasonable. The sum was levied three months after the service charge had initially been demanded.”
“this demand was not accompanied by the requisite Summary of Rights and Obligations. The Tribunal is therefore satisfied that this sum is not payable.”
“Taking all these factors into account, Judge Latham is satisfied that the sum sought is unreasonably high. He assesses costs in the sum of £6,000, including VAT.”
“The Respondent has failed to heed these Directions. At a late stage, he sought to fundamentally change his case to plead a Counterclaim in the sum of £33,874. It is not open to any party to do this.”
“The Respondent's Reply did not respond to the points raised by the Applicant. He rather included a 'Statement of Cost and Expenditure to be Claimed from WTA' which framed a new Counterclaim in the sum of £33,874.40.”
“Counsel charges a brief fee of £2,000, which is high for this modest claim.”
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.