LON/00BE/LSC/2022/0234 — service charge decision
In LON/00BE/LSC/2022/0234, decided 2 November 2023, the First-tier Tribunal considered 16 disputed service charge items at Rennie Court, Kings Reach, Stamford Street, London, SE1 and reached a mixed result: 4 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Rennie Court, Kings Reach, Stamford Street, London, SE1
Decision date: 2 November 2023
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: CBRE.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Management fees (2021) | £3,172.90 | — | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered, Duplication of charges |
| Other charges (2021) | £10,746.88 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2021) | £2,701 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Gardening & grounds (2021) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2021) | £2,021 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2015) | £679.52 | — | conceded | Section 20B 18-month time limit |
| Other charges (2017) | — | — | conceded | Section 20B 18-month time limit |
| Management fees (2015-2017) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2015-2018) | — | — | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation |
| Other charges (2016) | £12,114.87 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2018) | £19,052.95 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2019) | £18,336.80 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2020) | £16,710.72 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2021) | £17,749.06 | — | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Other charges (2022) | £20,021.36 | — | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Management fees (2021) | £1,041.42 | — | conceded | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
Key passages (verbatim)
“We are satisfied that this is unreasonable... an appropriate management fee to levy in respect of Rennie Court is 8% of the net expenditure for which it is liable.”
“We are satisfied that the Applicant has operated a well-run security system which benefits the whole Estate, including the Rennie Court residents. We are also satisfied that the costs incurred have been reasonable.”
“The Applicant has rather charged them 5.02% reflecting the fact that they only use the Estate Carpark for access. We are satisfied that this charge is reasonable.”
“We are satisfied that the Podium Garden is an important amenity for the Rennie Court tenants and that the service charges have been reasonable.”
“the Tribunal is satisfied that the modest charge made to the Rennie Court is reasonable, having regard to the use that they make of it.”
“The Applicant is no longer claiming £679.52 for the estate charge over the period 30 November to 31 December 2015.”
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.