LON/00BG/LSC/2021/0287 — service charge decision
In LON/00BG/LSC/2021/0287, decided 3 May 2023, the First-tier Tribunal considered 20 disputed service charge items at Various Properties at St. David's Square, London E14 and reached a mixed result: 15 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Various Properties at St. David's Square, London E14
Decision date: 3 May 2023
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: FirstPort Bespoke Property Services Limited / Freehold Managers Plc.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2018) | — | £36,551.25 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2019) | — | £37,105.56 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2020) | — | £37,105.56 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2018) | — | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Other grounds |
| Management fees (2019) | — | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Other grounds |
| Management fees (2020) | — | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Other grounds |
| Buildings insurance (2018) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2019) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2020) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Staffing & concierge (2019) | — | £21,951.19 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Staffing & concierge (2020) | — | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Legal & professional costs (2018) | — | — | Reduced | Standard not reasonable (s19(1)(b)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Legal & professional costs (2019) | — | — | Reduced | Standard not reasonable (s19(1)(b)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Legal & professional costs (2020) | — | — | Reduced | Standard not reasonable (s19(1)(b)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Repairs & maintenance (2019) | — | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Standard not reasonable (s19(1)(b)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2020) | — | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Standard not reasonable (s19(1)(b)) |
| Repairs & maintenance (2019) | — | £3,701.44 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2019) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2020) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2020) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“In summary the following sums are allowed for the Countryside Contracts for the period in question: 2018: £36551.25”
“In summary the following sums are allowed for the Countryside Contracts for the period in question: 2019: £37105.56”
“In summary the following sums are allowed for the Countryside Contracts for the period in question: 2020: £37105.56”
“the tribunal would impose at 10% deduction in the charges for each year”
“the tribunal would impose at 10% deduction in the charges for each year”
“the tribunal would impose at 10% deduction in the charges for each year”
“Mr Williams was an unsatisfactory witness. As it came out his evidence merely confirmed that he had no real understanding of the contracts he was trying to defend. He didn't even have copies of the contracts at the relevant time when he made the decisions in relation to their termination. This is extraordinary. More extraordinary is the fact that he didn't even know when the contracts were due to end.”
“Mr. Williams failed to keep tabs on the Countryside Contracts and didn't even have copies of the contracts during the relevant time which is flabbergasting. He appeared unaware of his responsibilities as a manager and was defensive when asked questions about his role in the decisions made.”
“This is surprising. Countryside must have some idea, at least at a ball park level, of the split.”
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.