Decision summary

MAN/00BU/LSC/2023/0018 — service charge decision

In MAN/00BU/LSC/2023/0018, decided 8 November 2023, the First-tier Tribunal considered 8 disputed service charge items at 41 St James Court, Altrincham, Cheshire and found largely for the landlord: 0 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.

Property: 41 St James Court, Altrincham, Cheshire
Decision date: 8 November 2023
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK

Managing agent named in the decision: Firstport Retirement Property Services Limited.

What was challenged and what the tribunal decided

ItemDemandedAllowedOutcomeGrounds
Management fees (2015-16)£315.37£315.37Allowed in full
Management fees (2016-17)£323.25£323.25Allowed in full
Management fees (2017-18)£323.24£323.24Allowed in full
Management fees (2018-19)£332.96£332.96Allowed in full
Management fees (2019-20)£341.28£341.28Allowed in full
Management fees (2020-21)£349.78£349.78Allowed in full
Management fees (2021-22)£356.43£356.43Allowed in full
Management fees (2022-23)£370.72£370.72Allowed in full

Section 20C order: granted.

Key passages (verbatim)

“the management fees element of the service charges for the service charge years 2015-2023 are payable and reasonable.”
On management fees
“the management fees element of the service charges for the service charge years 2015-2023 are payable and reasonable.”
On management fees
“the management fees element of the service charges for the service charge years 2015-2023 are payable and reasonable.”
On management fees
“the management fees element of the service charges for the service charge years 2015-2023 are payable and reasonable.”
On management fees
“the management fees element of the service charges for the service charge years 2015-2023 are payable and reasonable.”
On management fees
“the management fees element of the service charges for the service charge years 2015-2023 are payable and reasonable.”
On management fees
“We were not impressed by the Respondent's solicitor's response to the application. Many of the arguments are statements of fact regarding service charges generally rather than pertaining to the issue before us. It also responds to matters not disputed by the Applicant.”
Of Respondent / Firstport Retirement Property Services Limited (managing agent)
“However, even with the benefit of an extension, the Respondent's supplemental statement still does not provide any information as to how the sum has been calculated for any of the service charge years. What past records did the Respondent's solicitors obtain? There must be an initial calculation of the cost of services. The Respondent's solicitor asserts that the Respondent seeks to recover only costs incurred and does not seek to recover a profit. The Respondent must therefore know what the costs are despite the lack of time recording, to know that it is not recovering a profit.”
Of Respondent's solicitor
“We are not clear why the Respondent or the managing agent are so unwilling to provide the relevant information, from which we draw an adverse inference.”
Of Respondent / managing agent
“Annex A3 of the Respondent's Supplemental Response does not set out, as claimed, a comparison between the management fees and the LSE limits in each service charge year as claimed. It contains figures for the management fees for each service charge year that are different to those previously referred to by both the Applicant and Respondent, for example for 2021/2 Annex A3 refers to £361.65 rather than the £356.43, with no explanation.”
Of Respondent's solicitor

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.