LON/00BF/LSC/2023/0155 — service charge decision
In LON/00BF/LSC/2023/0155, decided 11 October 2023, the First-tier Tribunal considered 7 disputed service charge items at 18 Bute Court Bute Road Wallington Sutton SM6 8AG and found largely for the leaseholder: 4 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 18 Bute Court Bute Road Wallington Sutton SM6 8AG
Decision date: 11 October 2023
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buildings insurance (2017) | £539.54 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Insurance not market tested, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Buildings insurance (2021) | £706.94 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Section 20B 18-month time limit |
| Buildings insurance (2022) | £762.88 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Insurance not market tested, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Buildings insurance (2023) | £908.43 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Insurance not market tested, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Buildings insurance (2018) | — | £0 | conceded | — |
| Buildings insurance (2019) | — | £0 | conceded | — |
| Buildings insurance (2020) | — | £0 | conceded | — |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“The Respondent has failed to engage with the Tribunal or the Applicants or produce any evidence to explain how the policy complies with the covenants in the lease.”
“The Tribunal determines that on the balance of probabilities, doing the best it can on the very limited information available, that the 2nd invoice in respect of 2021-22 was not received within 18 months of the costs being incurred.”
“Since all the flats are of the same size it is incomprehensible on the evidence available that a fair proportion of the premium for the building can varying from one flat to another.”
“The latter figure cannot be defined as reasonable. We had no evidence of any alternative amount for the premium under the terms of the lease.”
“The Respondent has failed to engage with the Tribunal or the Applicants or produce any evidence to explain how the policy complies with the covenants in the lease.”
“Since all the flats are of the same size it is incomprehensible on the evidence available that a fair proportion of the premium for the building can varying from one flat to another and certainly not from £465.15 to £908.43 for the same period. The latter figure cannot be defined as reasonable.”
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.