LON/00BA/LSC/2024/0155 — service charge decision
In LON/00BA/LSC/2024/0155, decided 28 October 2024, the First-tier Tribunal considered 16 disputed service charge items at 85 Framfield Road, London, CR4 2AW and reached a mixed result: 7 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 85 Framfield Road, London, CR4 2AW
Decision date: 28 October 2024
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Praxis Block Management.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buildings insurance (2018/19) | £1,398.16 | £504.30 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Insurance not market tested |
| Buildings insurance (2019/20) | £1,476.98 | £930.46 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Insurance not market tested |
| Buildings insurance (2020/21) | £1,522.51 | £984.61 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Insurance not market tested |
| Buildings insurance (2021/22) | £1,614.44 | £1,076.07 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Insurance not market tested |
| Buildings insurance (2022/23) | £1,894.08 | £1,189.16 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Insurance not market tested |
| Buildings insurance (2023/24) | £2,074.87 | £1,274.46 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Insurance not market tested |
| Other charges (2018/19) | £300 | £300 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2022/23) | £240 | £240 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2023/24) | £240 | — | Withdrawn | — |
| Management fees (2019/20) | £300 | £300 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2020/21) | £320 | £320 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2021/22) | £330 | £330 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2022/23) | £340 | £340 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2023/24) | £726.44 | — | Disallowed entirely | — |
| Administration charges (2023/24) | £360 | £0 | conceded | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2023/24) | £319.20 | £319.20 | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“The Tribunal finds that, because the Property was covered under a block policy, the insurance premiums were higher and that this resulted in an unreasonable charge.”
“The Tribunal finds that, because the Property was covered under a block policy, the insurance premiums were higher and that this resulted in an unreasonable charge.”
“The Tribunal finds that, because the Property was covered under a block policy, the insurance premiums were higher and that this resulted in an unreasonable charge.”
“The Tribunal finds that, because the Property was covered under a block policy, the insurance premiums were higher and that this resulted in an unreasonable charge.”
“The Tribunal finds that, because the Property was covered under a block policy, the insurance premiums were higher and that this resulted in an unreasonable charge.”
“The Tribunal finds that, because the Property was covered under a block policy, the insurance premiums were higher and that this resulted in an unreasonable charge.”
“The Tribunal hopes that going forward the communication between the parties can improve, so that the tenants' queries are dealt with promptly.”
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.