LON/00BA/LSC/2022/0036 — service charge decision
In LON/00BA/LSC/2022/0036, decided 7 November 2022, the First-tier Tribunal considered 24 disputed service charge items at 26 Queen Elizabeth Gardens, Morden and reached a mixed result: 13 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 26 Queen Elizabeth Gardens, Morden
Decision date: 7 November 2022
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2014/15) | £19.67 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2015/16) | £14.21 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2016/17) | £19.58 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2017/18) | £14.43 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Repairs & maintenance (2014/15) | £83.99 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2016/17) | £92.46 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2019/20) | £86.96 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Staffing & concierge (2014/15) | £29.14 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Staffing & concierge (2015/16) | £12.71 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2014/15) | £15.87 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2015/16) | £12.71 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2016/17) | £16.47 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2017/18) | £15.97 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2014/15) | £171.70 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2015/16) | £207.36 | — | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Management fees (2016/17) | £207.36 | — | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Management fees (2017/18) | £207.36 | — | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Management fees (2018/19) | £207.36 | — | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Management fees (2019/20) | £207.36 | — | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Management fees (2020/21) | £159.87 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2021/22) | £207.36 | — | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Management fees (2022/23) | £207.36 | — | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Administration charges (2021/22) | £32.53 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Administration charges (2022/23) | £32.20 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“In the absence of any explanation in relation to these charges, and given the nature of the block the Tribunal determines that the sums due for block charges are not reasonable and not payable.”
“In the absence of any explanation in relation to these charges, and given the nature of the block the Tribunal determines that the sums due for block charges are not reasonable and not payable.”
“In the absence of any explanation in relation to these charges, and given the nature of the block the Tribunal determines that the sums due for block charges are not reasonable and not payable.”
“In the absence of any explanation in relation to these charges, and given the nature of the block the Tribunal determines that the sums due for block charges are not reasonable and not payable.”
“the tribunal was satisfied that these sums were proportionate for the age of the building, and that the accounts had been certified, and that small reactive repairs had been carried out.”
“the tribunal was satisfied that these sums were proportionate for the age of the building, and that the accounts had been certified, and that small reactive repairs had been carried out.”
“It noted that there was a lack of proactivity from the landlord concerning dealing with the Applicant's queries on service charges. It also noted that there were years in which the expenditure in relation to the building was small, given this it would not have been difficult to respond proactively to the Applicant.”
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.