LON/00BJ/LSC/2024/0256 — service charge decision
In LON/00BJ/LSC/2024/0256, decided 7 July 2025, the First-tier Tribunal considered 8 disputed service charge items at Viridian Apartments, 75 Battersea Park Road, London SW8 4DG and reached a mixed result: 7 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Viridian Apartments, 75 Battersea Park Road, London SW8 4DG
Decision date: 7 July 2025
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Viridian Residents Management Co Limited.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Staffing & concierge (2018-2025) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Utilities (2018-2025) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Cleaning (2018-2025) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Lifts (2018-2025) | — | — | Reduced | Apportionment error |
| Management fees (2018-2025) | — | — | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Legal & professional costs (2018-2025) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges (2018-2025) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Repairs & maintenance (2018-2025) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the tribunal finds the applicants are not required under the terms of the sub-leases to contribute to: the cost of the concierge … the respondent's decision to provide limited access/use of concierge services does not require the applicants to contribute to them under the terms of the sub-leases and have been unreasonably incurred.”
“the tribunal finds the applicants are not required under the terms of the sub-leases to contribute to: … the provision of communal water and electricity … that relate solely to the Development.”
“the tribunal finds the applicants are not required under the terms of the sub-leases to contribute to: … the cleaning of common areas, litter picking and sweeping … that relate solely to the Development.”
“The tribunal finds the applicants are required to pay a 'fair proportion' to the maintenance of the lift service which the first respondent can determine.”
“The tribunal finds the management fees charge to the applicants are in excess of those charged to Blocks V2 to V7 although the services and amenities provided under the sub-leases are considerably less … the management fees should be reduced appropriately for all of the years in dispute to reflect the limited services provided.”
“the tribunal finds the applicants are not required under the terms of the sub-leases to contribute to: … professional fees … that relate solely to the Development.”
“The parties' accepted that the sub-leases had been poorly drafted in that the obligations to pay service charges did not mirror those contained in the headlease and required the first respondent to contribute towards certain costs of the 'Estate' known as the Development in the headlease and outside of the 'Estate' known in the sub-leases as Block V1.”
“Due to the fact that the sub-lease has been poorly drafted, and contains many internal inconsistencies and undefined terms, it is impossible to be sure which definition is to be preferred.”
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.