LON/00BK/LSC/2021/0252 — service charge decision
In LON/00BK/LSC/2021/0252, decided 16 November 2021, the First-tier Tribunal considered 11 disputed service charge items at Flat 6, 30-32 St. Petersburgh Place, London and found largely for the landlord: 0 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 6, 30-32 St. Petersburgh Place, London
Decision date: 16 November 2021
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Mr. D. Pike.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2017) | £3,492.04 | £3,492.04 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2018) | £3,690.76 | £3,690.76 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2019) | £6,608.01 | £6,608.01 | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2019) | £2,917.25 | £2,917.25 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2020) | £4,178.35 | £4,178.35 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2021) | £4,814.28 | £4,814.28 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2017) | £833.52 | £833.52 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2018) | £833.52 | £833.52 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2019) | £833.52 | £833.52 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2020) | £833.52 | £833.52 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2021) | £833.52 | £833.52 | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: refused.
Key passages (verbatim)
“The Tribunal determines that the sums payable by the Respondent by way of service charges in respect of the service charge years ending on 31 December each year are as follows; 2017 - £3,492.04”
“2018 - £3,690.76”
“2019 - £6,608.01”
“An additional levy was sought from the leaseholders of £17,503.50, of which the Respondent's share was £2,917.25, as payment towards the major works.”
“2020 - £4,178.35”
“2021 - £4,814.28”
“At best he put forward an argument, unsupported by any documentary evidence, that the term of the lease providing for the recovery of contributions to the reserve fund no longer applied to him. In the absence of any such clear evidence, this was clearly a hopeless argument which the Respondent himself abandoned in the course of the hearing.”
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.