LON/00BK/LSC/2020/0147 — service charge decision
In LON/00BK/LSC/2020/0147, decided 9 June 2021, the First-tier Tribunal considered 16 disputed service charge items at Flat 62 William Court, 6 Hall Road, London NW8 9PB and reached a mixed result: 7 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 62 William Court, 6 Hall Road, London NW8 9PB
Decision date: 9 June 2021
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Residential Facilities Management Limited.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2014/15) | £17,509 | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2015/16) | £16,983 | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2016/17) | £17,304 | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2017/18) | £17,481 | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2018/19) | £20,163 | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2019/20) | £18,091 | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2020/21) | £18,633 | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Staffing & concierge (2014/15) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Staffing & concierge (2015/16) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Staffing & concierge (2016/17) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Staffing & concierge (2017/18) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Staffing & concierge (2018/19) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Staffing & concierge (2019/20) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Staffing & concierge (2020/21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2014/15) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Gardening & grounds (2014/15) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
Key passages (verbatim)
“we find that the CCTV and entry phone system costs fall to be reduced by 15%.”
“we find that the CCTV and entry phone system costs fall to be reduced by 15%.”
“we find that the CCTV and entry phone system costs fall to be reduced by 15%.”
“we find that the CCTV and entry phone system costs fall to be reduced by 15%.”
“we find that the CCTV and entry phone system costs fall to be reduced by 15%.”
“we find that the CCTV and entry phone system costs fall to be reduced by 15%.”
“his statement that to enter into a 20-year contract on such onerous terms was the industry standard at that time is unsupported by any specific evidence. The Tribunal was not presented with any evidence showing that steps were taken to test the market in 2002 and or with evidence concerning the range of contracts which were being offered in 2002 by different providers.”
“we do not think we can place much weight on this statement because he went on to say that this is no more than a guess because modern rental contracts of this type do not actually exist.”
“The weekend shift work has been described by the Applicant as 'overtime' when in fact it falls within the standard 7 day a week working pattern.”
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.