LON/00BG/LSC/2024/0228 & others — service charge decision
In LON/00BG/LSC/2024/0228 & others, decided 6 November 2025, the First-tier Tribunal considered 9 disputed service charge items at Flats 4 & 5, 94 Bromley High Street, Bow, London E3 3EG and reached a mixed result: 3 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flats 4 & 5, 94 Bromley High Street, Bow, London E3 3EG
Decision date: 6 November 2025
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Salter Rex.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Repairs & maintenance (2019-2020) | £4,568.14 | — | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges (2019-2020) | £1,169 | £1,169 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2020-2021) | £1,521.29 | £1,521.29 | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2021-2022) | £8,810.10 | — | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges (2021-2022) | £1,688.62 | £1,688.62 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2022-2023) | £1,604.85 | £1,604.85 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2023-2024) | £7,201.64 | — | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges (2023-2024) | £1,416.73 | £1,416.73 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2024-2025) | £959.17 | £959.17 | Allowed in full | — |
Key passages (verbatim)
“the sums demanded from the two applicants for the major works as follows are not payable: £4568.14 – 10/11/20”
“the per unit management charges were reasonable and this was an outlier property which was difficult to manage. On balance we consider that the sums claimed for the regular service charges were reasonable.”
“the per unit management charges were reasonable and this was an outlier property which was difficult to manage. On balance we consider that the sums claimed for the regular service charges were reasonable.”
“the sums demanded from the two applicants for the major works as follows are not payable: £8810.10 -3/3/22”
“On balance we consider that the sums claimed for the regular service charges were reasonable.”
“On balance we consider that the sums claimed for the regular service charges were reasonable.”
“The Applicants were sent threatening correspondence despite the fact that no determination had been obtained. The Second Applicant is still facing the consequences of a County Court Judgment which should not have been obtained. The Respondents would be well advised to review their recovery procedures which are oppressive and in parts illegal. Their solicitors PDC added legal charges to the demands which should be removed as the legal proceedings were altogether peremptory and unfair. The second Applicant had requested payment by instalments but this request was not responded to.”
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.