LON/00AR/LSC/2024/0002 — service charge decision
In LON/00AR/LSC/2024/0002, decided 14 October 2024, the First-tier Tribunal considered 21 disputed service charge items at 1-6 Steelway Apartments, 61A South Street, Romford RM1 1NL and found largely for the leaseholder: 18 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 1-6 Steelway Apartments, 61A South Street, Romford RM1 1NL
Decision date: 14 October 2024
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Eagerstates Ltd.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buildings insurance (2022-23) | £5,831.48 | £3,675 | Reduced | Insurance not market tested, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Buildings insurance (2023-24) | £6,123.05 | £3,860 | Reduced | Insurance not market tested, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Major works (2022-23) | £21,347.20 | — | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022-23) | £2,220.60 | £2,220.60 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022-23) | £2,301 | £1,950 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022-23) | £1,260 | £1,260 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022-23) | £474 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Poor standard of work, Works not necessary |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022-23) | £1,380 | £1,380 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022-23) | £2,595.48 | £2,310.48 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022-23) | £1,620 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Poor standard of work, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2022-23) | £408 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Cleaning (2022-23) | £500 | £325 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Legal & professional costs (2022-23) | £570 | £200 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2022-23) | £2,284.80 | £1,142.40 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered, Poor standard of work |
| Utilities (2022-23) | £556.87 | £486.48 | Reduced | Duplication of charges |
| Cleaning (2022-23) | £1,467.84 | £733.92 | Reduced | Poor standard of work |
| Other charges (2022-23) | £1,998 | £999 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2022-23) | £4,698.47 | £3,523.85 | Reduced | Duplication of charges, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2022-23) | £144 | £72 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2022-23) | £108 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Legal & professional costs (2022-23) | £180 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“We are therefore satisfied that a reasonable sum for insurance was £3,500 for 2021/22, but we allow an uplift of 5% increasing this to £3,675 for 2022/23 and £3,860 for the budget for 2023/24. The reduction for 2022/23 is £2,156.48.”
“The Tribunal reduces the sum included for insurance in the budget for 2023/24 from £6,123.05 to £3,860.”
“The Tribunal finds that the Respondent failed to comply with its statutory duty to consult in respect of the major roofing works. The total cost of the works was £21,347.20. Only 50% (£10,673.60) would be passed on to the tenants. However, these costs are capped at £250 per tenant.”
“We first consider the emergency works carried out by BML Security & Facilities Management in October 2022 at a cost of £2,220.60. Only 50% of the cost (£1,110.30) have been passed on to the tenants. They were therefore not qualifying works. We are satisfied that these costs are payable.”
“The Tribunal therefore allows the Superior Facilities Maintenance charge of £1,950. However, the Tribunal disallows Eagerstates' Section 20 consultation fee of £351. There is no evidence that any statutory notices were served.”
“The works were executed to prevent water penetration into the shop premises. The Tribunal therefore allows this charge.”
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.