LON/00BK/LSC/2020/0124 — service charge decision
In LON/00BK/LSC/2020/0124, decided 19 February 2021, the First-tier Tribunal considered 21 disputed service charge items at Flat 1, 1 Montagu Place, London W1H 2EW and reached a mixed result: 9 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 1, 1 Montagu Place, London W1H 2EW
Decision date: 19 February 2021
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Burlington Estates.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buildings insurance (2019) | £1,967 | £1,967 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2019) | £281 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Buildings insurance (2019) | £792 | £792 | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2019) | £2,962 | £2,962 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2019) | £3,348 | £3,348 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2019) | £1,116 | £1,116 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2019) | £8,679 | £4,500 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Administration charges (2019) | £373 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges (2019) | £330 | £330 | Allowed in full | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2019) | £3,150 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges (2019) | £696 | £696 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2019) | £20,000 | £7,500 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2019) | £378 | £378 | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2020) | £3,500 | £3,500 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2020) | £775 | £775 | Allowed in full | — |
| Utilities (2020) | £1,000 | £1,000 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2020) | £3,000 | £2,500 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2020) | £0 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Management fees (2020) | £8,984 | £4,500 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Legal & professional costs (2020) | £4,000 | £4,000 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2020) | £20,000 | £7,500 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
Section 20C order: partial.
Key passages (verbatim)
“It was satisfied that the reasonable cost for buildings insurance for the 2019 service charge year was the total sum set out in the year-end accounts, to which there had been no challenge.”
“This had been disputed by the Applicant on the basis that it was not provided for under the terms of the lease. This was accepted by the Respondent in the Scott Schedule”
“No challenge was raised in respect of the reasonableness of this charge and so the Tribunal was satisfied that it was payable.”
“he made it clear that he did not challenge this amount. The Tribunal therefore concluded that this was a reasonable charge and that it was payable.”
“at the hearing he made it clear that he was not challenging this sum. The Tribunal was, therefore, satisfied that this was a reasonable charge which was payable.”
“There was no challenge to these amounts, which totalled £1,116.”
“The Tribunal found Mr. Hymers' evidence about why the fee was justified to be somewhat contradictory. Initially he said that the figure was high because there was a substantial amount of additional work required for this property.”
“It is clear that no such charge has been made, so it is difficult to see that the charge is as high as it is because of excessive demands by the Applicant or other leaseholders.”
“That is clearly inconsistent with the charge being what it is because of excess work being required.”
“the evidence of Mr. Hymers in particular was far from clear and the documents also did not seem to be consistent.”
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.