LON/00BK/LSC/2021/0342 — service charge decision
In LON/00BK/LSC/2021/0342, decided 6 June 2022, the First-tier Tribunal considered 6 disputed service charge items at Flat 1, 25A Duke Street, London W1U 1DJ and found largely for the leaseholder: 5 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 1, 25A Duke Street, London W1U 1DJ
Decision date: 6 June 2022
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Lee Baron (agents for Dupict Properties Limited, Superior Landlord).
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2018-19) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges (2019-20) | £3,216.16 | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges (2020-21) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Not payable under the lease |
| Buildings insurance (2021-22) | £72 | £72 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2021-22) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2018-19) | — | — | Reduced | Apportionment error |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“in the absence of any evidence from the respondent that the Superior Landlord has undertaken any repair or redecoration… the tribunal accept Mr Sayiar's evidence that there has been no such work and there should be no charge for these works”
“in the absence of any evidence from the respondent that the Superior Landlord has undertaken any repair or redecoration… there should be no charge for these works”
“in the absence of any evidence from the respondent that the Superior Landlord has undertaken any repair or redecoration… there should be no charge for these works”
“The tribunal determines that the only element of the superior landlord's costs which is reasonable, and for which the applicant is liable, is the premium paid by the superior landlord for public and property owner liability insurance, stated to be £72”
“Insofar as staff costs and management fees are concerned these are not recoverable by way of Headlease Service Charge under clauses 14.2, 14.3 or 14.4 of the Headlease.”
“a fair and reasonable proportion of the service charge payable by the applicant would be 33% of the costs incurred by the respondent in respect of the two flats at 25A Duke Street… and not one half of such costs”
“It is unfortunate that when the agent changed (possibly when the Superior Landlord changed) the respondent did not check liability to pay/reasonableness of the sums demanded before including them in its own service charge demand.”
“Mr Last stated, on being asked by the tribunal, that he believed that the demands for Headlease Service Charge were included in the service charge demands made of the applicant without scrutiny by the respondent as to whether there was liability to pay/ reasonableness, by reason of the terms of the Headlease and the applicant's own lease.”
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.