LON/00AW/LSC/2022/0288 — service charge decision
In LON/00AW/LSC/2022/0288, decided 12 April 2023, the First-tier Tribunal considered 15 disputed service charge items at Ground Floor Flat, 31 Lennox Gardens, London SW1X 0DE and reached a mixed result: 9 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Ground Floor Flat, 31 Lennox Gardens, London SW1X 0DE
Decision date: 12 April 2023
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Quadrant Property Management Ltd.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Major works (2020/21) | £8,809.11 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Buildings insurance (2021/22) | £18,073 | £18,073 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2021/22) | £18,073 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2022/23) | £420 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022/23) | £10,000 | £2,500 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Cleaning (2022/23) | £5,300 | £2,600 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2022/23) | £500 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges (2022/23) | £2,000 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2022/23) | £3,000 | £2,600 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Buildings insurance (2022/23) | £18,073 | £18,073 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2022/23) | £250 | £250 | Allowed in full | — |
| Lifts (2022/23) | £1,000 | £1,000 | Allowed in full | — |
| Lifts (2022/23) | £8,000 | £5,000 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Lifts (2022/23) | £500 | £500 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2022/23) | £60,000 | £60,000 | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: conditional.
Key passages (verbatim)
“The Tribunal do not accept that the supplementary sum of £8,809.11 was reasonably demanded. There were no invoices provided in the hearing bundle for the charge. The Respondent provided no cogent justification for the supplementary charges, other than the failure of the previous managing agent to adequately account for the spend on this work.”
“It is for the reasons listed above that the Tribunal find the insurance charge of £18,073 as evidenced by the invoice submitted in the bundle is reasonable.”
“The Tribunal finds that this is a wholly unacceptable justification for making the supplementary charge as described by Mr G Gzarycki and Mr Whitehouse and the relevant proportion of the sum payable by the applicant is disallowed.”
“Nil”
“This sum is not reasonable, as no justification given for increase. The Tribunal allow £2500 (same as previous year)”
“The Cleaning costs are to be £2,600”
“The Tribunal do not accept that the supplementary sum of £8,809.11 was reasonably demanded. There were no invoices provided in the hearing bundle for the charge. The Respondent provided no cogent justification for the supplementary charges, other than the failure of the previous managing agent to adequately account for the spend on this work.”
“The Tribunal finds that this is a wholly unacceptable justification for making the supplementary charge as described by Mr G Gzarycki and Mr Whitehouse and the relevant proportion of the sum payable by the applicant is disallowed.”
“The managing agent was not able to justify the estate maintenance sum in its submission. Mr Gzarycki explained to Tribunal that this sum was included as a precautionary measure to offset any likely charges made by Savills. This sum is not allowed.”
“The estate service charge is disallowed. The managing agent was unclear as to the purpose of this charge. There was no compelling evidence for the sum proposed.”
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.