LON/00AU/LSC/2020/0279 — service charge decision
In LON/00AU/LSC/2020/0279, decided 17 May 2021, the First-tier Tribunal considered 3 disputed service charge items at Flat C, 31 Archway Road, London N19 3TU and reached a mixed result: 3 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat C, 31 Archway Road, London N19 3TU
Decision date: 17 May 2021
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Legal & professional costs (2017-18) | £1,000 | £300 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Reserve fund contributions (2017-18) | £1,500 | £250 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2017-18) | £900 | £336 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered, Not payable under the lease |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“Our colleagues finding was that the costs were excessive and that £250 plus VAT for dealing with the two s20 notices was reasonable. We consider that an hour's work should cover these issues and concur with our colleagues on their assessment of the costs and allow the sum of £250 plus VAT.”
“Doing the best we can, we can see that in 2018/19 there were roof repairs in the sum of £5,850, covered in part by insurance monies in the sum of £5,600. There is a shortfall of £250. We allow that sum as a sinking fund contribution from the £1500 claimed.”
“We find that the management fee should be by reference to the sum of £3,359. What should be a reasonable fee?... we consider a management charge of 10% would be reasonable. This gives a management charge for this year of £336, rounded up, which we would allow as being reasonable.”
“There is still no evidence as to how the £1500 was assessed and the Respondent's explanation that it has been spent and is no longer an issue is not, in our finding the correct way of dealing with the matter.”
“We do not understand these accounts, nor the ones for 2017/18. Neither show any income from service charge contributions. Yet we know that the Applicant paid her share for this year and presumably so did the other tenants.”
“We see reference to the management fee being based on the time sent by the Respondent on management as wrong. It should be based on the expenditure incurred in the year.”
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.