LON/00AP/LSC/2024/0188 — service charge decision
In LON/00AP/LSC/2024/0188, decided 8 October 2024, the First-tier Tribunal considered 14 disputed service charge items at Flat 53 Lea Court, 143 Broad Lane, London, N15 4QH and found largely for the leaseholder: 14 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 53 Lea Court, 143 Broad Lane, London, N15 4QH
Decision date: 8 October 2024
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2024-2025) | £27.75 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2024-2025) | £89.73 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2024-2025) | £37 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Gardening & grounds (2024-2025) | £88.80 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2024-2025) | £64.75 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Reserve fund contributions (2024-2025) | £249.98 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Reserve fund contributions (2024-2025) | £250.01 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2024-2025) | £166.67 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2024-2025) | £18.50 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Cleaning (2024-2025) | £131.63 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Utilities (2024-2025) | £205.52 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2024-2025) | £50 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2024-2025) | £45.45 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Cleaning (2024-2025) | £41.67 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“Despite this, no invoices had been provided. The Respondent had not provided any accounts, and no accounts had been audited since 2019-2020… the Tribunal cannot be satisfied that these charges are reasonable.”
“For the same reasons as set out in relation to Bulk Refuse Disposals (Estate Costs) above, the Tribunal cannot be satisfied that these charges are reasonable.”
“For the same reasons as set out in relation to Bulk Refuse Disposals (Estate Costs) above, the Tribunal cannot be satisfied that these charges are reasonable.”
“Taking this into account, and for the same reasons as set out in relation to Bulk Refuse Disposals (Estate Costs) above, the Tribunal cannot be satisfied that these charges are reasonable.”
“It is not clear to the Tribunal what the estimated charges are for and how this relates to the contract for the gate… the Tribunal cannot be satisfied that these charges are reasonable.”
“In light of the fact that no charges had previously been made, the fact that there is no evidence as to what the planned/expected works are and on what basis the budget has been set… the Tribunal cannot be satisfied that these charges are reasonable.”
“The Applicant has been left in the position of only ever having been provided with estimated service charges – no 'reckoning' has been done, to determine whether the amount he had paid was more than the actual costs or was insufficient.”
“The estimates are, therefore, based on previous estimates and unverified figures.”
“Mr. Booker, beyond looking at the previous budgets and expenditure and confirming some of the expenditure already for the material year, could not explain the budget as it was not him who set the budget.”
“no accounts had been audited since 2019-2020”
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.