MAN/00CA/LSC/2020/0089 — service charge decision
In MAN/00CA/LSC/2020/0089, decided 14 March 2022, the First-tier Tribunal considered 6 disputed service charge items at Flat 2, Victoria Court, 21 Roe Lane, Southport and reached a mixed result: 2 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 2, Victoria Court, 21 Roe Lane, Southport
Decision date: 14 March 2022
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Major works (2019-2020) | £5,330 | — | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation |
| Management fees (2019-2020) | £382 | £382 | Allowed in full | — |
| Utilities (2019-2020) | — | — | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation |
| Gardening & grounds (2019-2020) | — | — | Withdrawn | — |
| Cleaning (2019-2020) | — | — | Withdrawn | — |
| Other charges (2019-2020) | £540 | £540 | Withdrawn | — |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the Management Company is not entitled to recover more than £250 from an individual tenant in respect of the costs of such works, unless or until dispensation is granted.”
“Anthony James' fees of £382 were reasonable and are payable as part of the service charges”
“the statutory limitation of £100 per Leaseholder will apply, unless dispensation is granted”
“he no longer disputed, nor sought a determination as to, the gardening/cleaning costs”
“he no longer disputed, nor sought a determination as to, the gardening/cleaning costs”
“he no longer disputed, nor sought a determination as to… the fees charged by the accountants”
“this case is an example of the potential perils of not having professional management to navigate the various statutory requirements. The Management Company by its ignorance and non-observance of the consultation requirements has made itself vulnerable to any flat owners who would prefer not to pay their share of the costs of major works or long-term contracts.”
“The parties were either unable or unwilling to properly comply with those Directions or to agree a single bundle of documents.”
“There appeared to be scant regard to the need under section 21B of the 1985 Act for payment demands to be accompanied by prescribed information as to leaseholders' rights and obligations.”
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.