LON/00AR/LSC/2022/0004 — service charge decision
In LON/00AR/LSC/2022/0004, decided 1 November 2022, the First-tier Tribunal considered 25 disputed service charge items at First Floor Flat, 393 Rush Green Road, Romford and reached a mixed result: 7 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: First Floor Flat, 393 Rush Green Road, Romford
Decision date: 1 November 2022
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Fountayne Managing Ltd.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Utilities (2019/2020) | £30 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Utilities (2020/2021) | £30 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Utilities (2021/2022) | £30 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges (2019/2020) | — | £103.50 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2020/2021) | — | £106.50 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2021/2022) | £285 | £150 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Works not necessary |
| Repairs & maintenance (2019/2020) | — | £60 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2020/2021) | — | £5 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2021/2022) | — | £125 | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2019/2020) | — | £123.50 | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2021/2022) | — | £125 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2019/2020) | — | £206.80 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2020/2021) | — | £213.42 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2021/2022) | — | £225 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2019/2020) | — | £45 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2020/2021) | — | £45 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2021/2022) | — | £45 | Allowed in full | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2019/2020) | — | £60 | Allowed in full | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2020/2021) | — | £300 | Allowed in full | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2021/2022) | — | £300 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2019/2020) | — | £100 | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation |
| Management fees (2020/2021) | — | £100 | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation |
| Management fees (2021/2022) | — | £100 | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation |
| Gardening & grounds (2021/2022) | — | £75 | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2021/2022) | — | £50 | Allowed in full | — |
Key passages (verbatim)
“Under this arrangement the applicant is not in our judgment providing any services to the respondents... Accordingly, we do not allow recovery of the sums.”
“Under this arrangement the applicant is not in our judgment providing any services to the respondents... Accordingly, we do not allow recovery of the sums.”
“Under this arrangement the applicant is not in our judgment providing any services to the respondents... Accordingly, we do not allow recovery of the sums.”
“The respondents accept the liability to pay £103.50 for the service charge year 2019/2020.”
“We find that the demand for £106.50 for the service charge year 2020/2021 is reasonable.”
“none of the previously recommended work has been done, and we consider that there is no need for a further assessment until the work is done... we reduce the amount to £150.00 per flat to allow for the provision of three interlinked alarms.”
“The applicant has failed to disclose any invoices relating to the management fees, nor a copy of the management agreement.”
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.