LON/00AQ/LSC/2024/0099 — service charge decision
In LON/00AQ/LSC/2024/0099, decided 10 July 2025, the First-tier Tribunal considered 26 disputed service charge items at Flat 11, Maison Alfort, 251 High Road, HA3 5EL and reached a mixed result: 23 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 11, Maison Alfort, 251 High Road, HA3 5EL
Decision date: 10 July 2025
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: KPLA.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buildings insurance (2020) | £2,913.26 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Buildings insurance (2021) | £2,792.66 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Buildings insurance (2022) | £3,299.99 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Utilities (2020) | £2,302.45 | £982.16 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Utilities (2021) | £1,974.12 | £1,035.20 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Utilities (2022) | £2,687.43 | £1,143.90 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2020) | £480 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Demand formally invalid |
| Other charges (2021) | £480 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Demand formally invalid |
| Other charges (2022) | £400 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Demand formally invalid |
| Repairs & maintenance (2020) | £1,210 | £1,210 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2021) | £550 | £550 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022) | £440 | £440 | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2020) | £3,826.25 | £1,750 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Cleaning (2021) | £4,387.50 | £1,844.50 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Cleaning (2022) | £4,680 | £2,038.17 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Management fees (2020) | £8,400 | £2,800 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Standard not reasonable (s19(1)(b)) |
| Management fees (2021) | £9,555 | £2,951.20 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Standard not reasonable (s19(1)(b)) |
| Management fees (2022) | £10,140 | £3,261.02 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Standard not reasonable (s19(1)(b)) |
| Legal & professional costs (2020) | £5,500 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges (2020) | £2,000 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2021) | £2,000 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2022) | £2,000 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2020) | £31,200 | £1,820 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Works not necessary |
| Other charges (2021) | £3,640 | £1,918.28 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Works not necessary |
| Other charges (2022) | £4,160 | £2,119.70 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Works not necessary |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022) | £920 | £675 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
Section 20C order: conditional.
Key passages (verbatim)
“We find the express provisions of the lease require insurance is taken out in joint names. The Applicant accepts that, in breach of those provisions, for the periods in dispute, insurance was in the Applicant's name only. In light of the binding authority in Green, we conclude that the Respondents are not liable for the insurance premiums being claimed.”
“We find the express provisions of the lease require insurance is taken out in joint names. The Applicant accepts that, in breach of those provisions, for the periods in dispute, insurance was in the Applicant's name only.”
“We find the express provisions of the lease require insurance is taken out in joint names. The Applicant accepts that, in breach of those provisions, for the periods in dispute, insurance was in the Applicant's name only.”
“The Respondent offered £982.16 for electricity, which corresponds to the total of the estimated bills provided by the Applicant … we consider £982.16 to be a reasonable amount for the electricity charges.”
“For subsequent years, this figure was used as a baseline and adjusted according to the Consumer Price Index for 2021 and 2022.”
“For subsequent years, this figure was used as a baseline and adjusted according to the Consumer Price Index for 2021 and 2022.”
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.