LON/00AY/LSC/2021/0364 — service charge decision
In LON/00AY/LSC/2021/0364, decided 3 November 2022, the First-tier Tribunal considered 6 disputed service charge items at Flat A, 4 Concanon Road, London SW2 5TA and found largely for the leaseholder: 6 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat A, 4 Concanon Road, London SW2 5TA
Decision date: 3 November 2022
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 (2016) | £134.28 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Other grounds |
| Other charges (2016) | £12 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Other grounds |
| Other charges (2017) | — | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Section 20B 18-month time limit |
| Administration charges (2020) | £1,080 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Other grounds |
| Administration charges (2020) | £140 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Other grounds |
| Legal & professional costs (2020) | £330 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Other grounds |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the Respondent claims to have extended the benefit of the Tribunal decision to the Applicant as well as the other two lessees and does not seek to alter this. On that basis, the Tribunal decided to follow its predecessor and hold that the sum of £146.28 is not payable by the Applicant.”
“the Applicant sought a determination that £134.28 in relation to insurance and £12 in relation to an emergency line, totalling £146.28, were not payable in accordance with the previous decision of the Tribunal.”
“the Upper Tribunal determined that none of the service charges for 2017 were payable to the Respondent due to their failure to comply with section 20B.”
“the Respondent has not presented a case justifying the charges and the Tribunal holds that they are not payable.”
“The Applicant also pointed to 'Admin charges' of £60 and £80 and court fees of £330.”
“The Applicant also pointed to 'Admin charges' of £60 and £80 and court fees of £330.”
“The Tribunal had bent over backwards to accommodate the Respondent and they had still failed to comply with the Tribunal's clear directions. The Tribunal decided to exclude the document and made no further reference to it.”
“It also does the Respondent little credit to rely on technicalities given their wholesale failure to comply with the Tribunal's directions.”
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.