Decision summary

LON/00BF/LSC/2022/0392 — service charge decision

In LON/00BF/LSC/2022/0392, decided 20 June 2023, the First-tier Tribunal considered 19 disputed service charge items at Flats 1 – 4, 14 St James Road, Sutton, Surrey SM1 2TP and reached a mixed result: 7 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.

Property: Flats 1 – 4, 14 St James Road, Sutton, Surrey SM1 2TP
Decision date: 20 June 2023
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK

Managing agent named in the decision: Eagerstates Limited.

What was challenged and what the tribunal decided

ItemDemandedAllowedOutcomeGrounds
Cleaning (2021)£384£192ReducedCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Cleaning (2022)£1,094.40£172.80ReducedCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Cleaning (2021)£666.45£666.45conceded
Repairs & maintenance (2021)£996£996Allowed in full
Other charges (2021)£397.63£397.63conceded
Management fees (2021)£1,176£1,176conceded
Cleaning (2022)£681.24£681.24conceded
Repairs & maintenance (2022)£550£0Disallowed entirelyPoor standard of work, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Repairs & maintenance (2022)£600£300ReducedPoor standard of work
Repairs & maintenance (2022)£500£500Allowed in full
Repairs & maintenance (2022)£498£0Disallowed entirelyCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a))
Repairs & maintenance (2022)£780£0Disallowed entirelyLandlord could not evidence the cost
Repairs & maintenance (2022)£900£900Allowed in full
Repairs & maintenance (2022)£2,183£2,183Allowed in full
Other charges (2022)£22,344.48£20,829.60ReducedFee excessive for service delivered
Repairs & maintenance (2022)£900£900Allowed in full
Other charges (2022)£810£810conceded
Other charges (2022)£810£810conceded
Management fees (2022)£1,190.40£1,190.40conceded

Section 20C order: partial.

Key passages (verbatim)

“it does consider that cleaning monthly is disproportionate and unnecessary; costs for cleaning more frequently than once per year would not be reasonably incurred. The invoices for 2021 provide for one clean to cost £192”
On cleaning
“cleaning monthly is disproportionate and unnecessary; costs for cleaning more frequently than once per year would not be reasonably incurred. The invoices for... 2022 one cost £172.80.”
On cleaning
“the Applicants agreed the quantums for the common parts cleaning, the fire door inspection and the management fee for 2021”
On cleaning
“Evidence of the amount due had been provided and without evidence that this was unreasonable, it had to accept this figure unless manifestly incorrect.”
On repairs & maintenance
“the Applicants agreed the quantums for the common parts cleaning, the fire door inspection and the management fee for 2021”
On other charges
“the Applicants agreed the quantums for the common parts cleaning, the fire door inspection and the management fee for 2021”
On management fees
“whilst much has been conceded by the Applicants, this is only as a result of the late production of invoices. Earlier engagement by the Respondent and its managing agents could well have avoided the need for this case to be brought to the tribunal.”
Of Respondent / Eagerstates Limited (managing agent)
“The Respondent has not addressed this in the Scott Schedule, simply referring to the invoice for the contractor. It argues that 20% is within the range of reasonable fees but has not provided any justification for the increase from the figure quoted in the consultation or denied the Applicants' objection to it.”
Of Respondent — external decorating management fee
“The Respondent was not able to provide assistance as to what works had been done and agreed that the Superior Facilities Maintenance invoice was unhelpful. It did refer to the invoice though as evidence of work and expressed the view that it was not for the landlord to evidence all works done.”
Of Respondent — pathway works

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.