LON/00BG/LSC/2023/0478 — service charge decision
In LON/00BG/LSC/2023/0478, decided 26 June 2024, the First-tier Tribunal considered 15 disputed service charge items at Flat 1, 26 East Tenter Street, London, E1 8DN and reached a mixed result: 3 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 1, 26 East Tenter Street, London, E1 8DN
Decision date: 26 June 2024
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Managed Exit Limited (trading as HAUS Management).
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2021) | £520 | £520 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2021) | £187 | £187 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2021) | £1,191 | £1,191 | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2021) | £2,022 | £2,022 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2021) | £660 | £660 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2021) | £714 | £714 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2021) | £2,600 | £2,200 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2021) | £462 | £462 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2021) | £5,950 | £4,394 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Cleaning (2022) | £1,894 | £1,894 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2022) | £2,671 | £2,200 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2022) | £520 | £520 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2022) | £187 | £187 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022) | £1,091 | £1,091 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2022) | £660 | £660 | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: partial.
Key passages (verbatim)
“It is a term of her lease that they are professionally audited and we consider that the sum claimed is reasonably incurred and reasonable in amount”
“We consider that this fee to be reasonably incurred and reasonable in amount.”
“it does not appear to be particularly high in the light of the comparable quotes she obtained which were in the region of £1,000. We consider that the sum sought was reasonable.”
“We consider that this cost is reasonable.”
“we consider that this item is reasonable and payable.”
“We do not consider this sum to be unreasonable.”
“This is not indicative of the level of service one might expect from a company whose charges fall into the top quartile of the market.”
“it is likely that these proceedings might have been avoided and/or the issues considerably narrowed if the respondent had properly responded to the Applicant's numerous requests that they supply her with copy invoices when asked to do so”
“the respondent does not appear to have responded to the applicant's invitation set out in an open letter dated 2 February 2024 (page 26 of the applicant's bundle) and repeated on 10 February 2024 (page 28 of the applicant's bundle) to engage with the mediation service offered by this tribunal”
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.