LON/00BK/LSC/2024/0206 & others — service charge decision
In LON/00BK/LSC/2024/0206 & others, decided 26 February 2025, the First-tier Tribunal considered 10 disputed service charge items at Ground Floor Flat (Flat 1), 229 Sussex Gardens, London, W2 2RL and reached a mixed result: 4 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Ground Floor Flat (Flat 1), 229 Sussex Gardens, London, W2 2RL
Decision date: 26 February 2025
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Inspired Property Management Ltd (IPM).
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reserve fund contributions (2022/23) | £1,755.20 | £1,755.20 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2023/24) | £2,852.20 | £2,852.20 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2024/25) | £2,852.20 | £2,852.20 | Allowed in full | — |
| Utilities (2023/24) | £3,729.80 | £1,491.92 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Utilities (2024/25) | £3,181.30 | £1,272.52 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Reserve fund contributions (2023/24) | £131.64 | £131.64 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2024/25) | £131.64 | £131.64 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Administration charges | £2,500 | £2,500 | Allowed in full | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2022/23) | — | £329.10 | Reduced | Other grounds |
Section 20C order: partial.
Key passages (verbatim)
“we are satisfied that it is reasonable to collect £68,000 on account of the major work to the exterior of the Building which is due to commence in 2025.”
“we are satisfied that it is reasonable to collect £68,000 on account of the major work to the exterior of the Building which is due to commence in 2025.”
“we are satisfied that it is reasonable to collect £68,000 on account of the major work to the exterior of the Building which is due to commence in 2025.”
“Doing our best on the extremely limited evidence available we find that the Applicant's share should be reduced to 10.97% of 40% of the total bill.”
“we find on the balance of probabilities that the appropriate way to split the gas bill is 40% for heating and 60% for hot water.”
“we are satisfied that the boiler reserve costs, which have been claimed from the Applicant and which are set out above, are payable in full.”
“Mr Peters gave evidence that IPM did not carry out a calculation in accordance with the RICS Code in order to ascertain the appropriate level of the reserve fund contributions.”
“the Respondents did not seek to put forward any reasoned basis for this 50/50 split.”
“We note that the Respondents' position at the hearing and in their Statement of Case differed from their position as set out in the Scott Schedule which is likely to be confusing for the Applicant.”
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.