LON/00BG/LSC/2020/0261 — service charge decision
In LON/00BG/LSC/2020/0261, decided 2 February 2021, the First-tier Tribunal considered 5 disputed service charge items at Link House, 193-197 Bow Road, London and found largely for the landlord: 0 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Link House, 193-197 Bow Road, London
Decision date: 2 February 2021
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Major works (2020) | £43,000 | £43,000 | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2020) | £10,000 | £10,000 | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2020) | £25,000 | £25,000 | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2020) | £40,000 | £40,000 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2019) | £16,659.60 | £16,659.60 | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20ZA dispensation: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“£43,000 for asbestos works, £10,000 for fire alarm works, £25,000 for major repairs and £40,000 for roof works, and the Applicant has provided details of the proposed works and the reasons for them.”
“The Applicant submits that all of the sums in the budget are reasonable, and the Applicant notes that none of the 29 leaseholders has objected to the budget.”
“we are satisfied that in the absence of any challenge the budgeted amount is fully payable by way of estimated service charge.”
“we are satisfied that in the absence of any challenge the budgeted amount is fully payable by way of estimated service charge.”
“we are satisfied that there was a good reason not to consult, that it is reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements in this case retrospectively and that the dispensation can be unconditional because there is no evidence of leaseholders being prejudiced.”
“her written submissions were not merely very late but they were also mostly irrelevant to the variation issue or any other issue before us”
“we are not persuaded that Ms Niakamal had a good reason for failing to comply with directions”
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.