VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tenant Successfully Challenges Excessive and Unauthorised Service Charges

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal ruled on disputed service charges, finding several charges a person or unauthorised under the lease agreement. The tenant successfully challenged charges such as a person, window cleaning, and fire safety services, arguing that these were either unauthorised or charged at a person rates.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to challenge unauthorised or a person service charges under their lease agreement.

Topics

service chargeslease agreementsdisputed charges

📖 Technical summary

The First-tier Tribunal ruled on disputed service charges, finding several charges a person or unauthorised under the lease.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal ruled on disputed service charges, finding several charges excessive or unauthorised under the lease agreement. The tenant argued that certain charges were not authorised by the lease and were excessive compared to market rates. The tribunal agreed, disallowing several charges and reducing others.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT SCHEDULE

DISPUTED SERVICE CHARGES S/C YEAR ENDED [2018]

Case Reference: LON/00AE/LSC/2024/0057 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

ITEM COST TENANT’S COMMENTS * [APPELLANT] * LEAVE BLANK (FOR THE TRIBUNAL) [NAME] £ 1338.14 [NAME] got quote for £581.54

The figure quoted is the total insurance premium including brokers fee and a management charge. Only half is sought from the Applicant. See our decision at paragraph 12 for this year and ongoing Management fee for collecting Ground rent £54.00 The lease does not state the [NAME] can charge a fee for collecting ground rent

We agree. We could not see any provisions for the recovery of a management charge within the terms of the lease. In this instance the sum of £54 is disallowed

2

SCHEDULE

DISPUTED SERVICE CHARGES S/C YEAR ENDED [2019]

ITEM COST TENANT’S COMMENTS * LANDLORD’S COMMENTS * LEAVE BLANK (FOR THE TRIBUNAL) [NAME] £ 1376.58 [NAME] got quote for £581.54

See our decision at para 12 as to the sum allowed Window cleaning £59.00 The responsibility of cleaning windows is the [NAME] not freeholder as set out in the lease

The lease does not enable the landlord to charge for cleaning windows as set out in our decision. This sum is therefore disallowed for all years in dispute Management fee for collecting Ground rent £56.40 The lease does not state the [NAME] can charge a fee for collecting ground rent

See above £56.40 disallowed

3 Fire safety survey

£269.04 [NAME] only has a single story communal area and got quote for £130.80 including vat

See our decision. We allow the sum of £130.80 for this charge as per the alternate quote at page 313 of the bundle which gives a charge of £65.40 as being payable [NAME] £290.28 [NAME] got quote for £110

Disallowed. Instead, we allow the alternate figure produced by LCL of £110, the moiety of which would be £55 and allow this for each annual service

SCHEDULE

DISPUTED SERVICE CHARGES S/C YEAR ENDED [2020]

ITEM COST TENANT’S COMMENTS * LANDLORD’S COMMENTS * LEAVE BLANK (FOR THE TRIBUNAL)

4 [NAME] £ 1442.52 [NAME] got quote for £581.54

As above see decision as to the sum allowed Window cleaning £235.62 The responsibility of cleaning windows is the [NAME] not freeholder as set out in the lease

Disallowed in full Management fee for collecting Ground rent £57.60 The lease does not state the [NAME] can charge a fee for collecting ground rent

Disallowed in full Drain works £960.00 No drains work has been carried out. Management fee for work was £300 – nearly 50% of cost

Disallowed in full [NAME] £290.28 [NAME] got quote for £110

£55 allowed

SCHEDULE

DISPUTED SERVICE CHARGES S/C YEAR ENDED [2021]

5 ITEM COST TENANT’S COMMENTS * LANDLORD’S COMMENTS * LEAVE BLANK (FOR THE TRIBUNAL) [NAME] £ 1442.54 [NAME] got quote for £581.54

See decision as to sum allowed Window cleaning £128.54 The responsibility of cleaning windows is the [NAME] not freeholder as set out in the lease

Disallowed in full Fire safety survey £297.36 Carried out in 2018 and should be conducted every 5 years. The building is only 3 stories and has no cladding.

Disallowed in full Management fee for collecting Ground rent £60.00 The lease does not state the [NAME] can charge a fee for collecting ground rent

Disallowed in full [NAME] £290.28 [NAME] got quote for £110

£55 allowed

SCHEDULE

DISPUTED SERVICE CHARGES S/C YEAR ENDED [2022]

6 ITEM COST TENANT’S COMMENTS * [APPELLANT] * LEAVE BLANK (FOR THE TRIBUNAL) [NAME] £ 1736.58 [NAME] got quote for £581.54

See decision as to the sum allowed Window cleaning £407.36 The responsibility of cleaning windows is the [NAME] not freeholder as set out in the lease

Disallowed in full Fire door survey £99.88 Already carried out this year not necessary to carry out again

Disallowed in full Fire door inspection £42.48 Already carried out this year not necessary to carry out again

Disallowed in full FHS Risk assessment £297.36 Carried out in 2018 and should be conducted every 5 years. The building is only 3 stories and has no cladding.

Disallowed in full [NAME] £290.28 [NAME] got quote for £110

£55 allowed ECIR £467.28 [NAME] got quote for £154.80

£77.40 allowed [NAME] £448.40 [NAME]

£143.40 allowed Cost assessment for insurance reinstatement £257.00 This survey was carried out in the previous year. That survey does not need to be carried out every year.

Disallowed in full Management fee for collecting Ground rent £62.40 The lease does not state the [NAME] can charge a fee for collecting ground rent

Disallowed in full

7 Preventative Maintenance survey £658.44 Not necessary to carry out on a property of this size. PPM surveys are considered necessary for blocks of apartments and larger, complex historically important privately owned dwellings. None of the works highlighted in the report have been carried out to date.

Allow £279.00

DISPUTED SERVICE CHARGES S/C YEAR ENDED [2023]

8 [NAME] £ 2,169.98 [NAME] got quote for £581.54

See decision as to the sum allowed Window cleaning £276.12 The responsibility of cleaning windows is the [NAME] not freeholder as set out in the lease

Disallowed in full Gutter cleaning £254.88 The gutters have never been cleaned, always advised in advance when they will be attending and never have turned up. Need access to clean the gutters in the rear.

Disallowed in full Electric works £587.64 Requested details of works carried out with no response or proof of work. No works have been carried out. Second invoice within 6 weeks

Disallowed in full Electrical works £294.54 Requested details of works carried out with no response or proof of work. No work has been carried out.

Disallowed in full FHS Risk assessment £481.44 Carried out in 2018 and should be conducted every 5 years. The building is only 3 stories and has no cladding.

Allow £204 Electricity bill £349.72 [NAME], invoices are always under £20 which I queried and I requested the invoice from the supplier – no documents have been provided

Disallowed in full see credit note at page 242 Gate repair £205.32 Never carried out, a [NAME] came in the evening (dark) and broke/detached the gate latch

Disallowed in full

9 from the wall so now it does not close the gate did not need fixing but now needs fixing Step Repair £560.50 Work not carried out, the property does not have a step

Disallowed in full BNO standard Audit £580.56 Not necessary to carry out the as the freeholder is only responsible for the communal parts of the building. I have requested a copy of the report and never provided. [NAME] in full Advanced Electrical Audit £592.08 Only necessary if a building has been flagged or there is a concern for electrical safety. The building has already had an EICR check with no concerns flagged. I requested a copy of the report and was advised it was a failed visit [NAME] in full Advanced Electrical Audit £552.24 Only necessary if a building has been flagged or there is a concern for electrical safety. The building has already had an EICR check with no concerns flagged.

Disallowed in full

10 I requested a copy of the report and again on the invoice it states unable to verify flat A due to no access another failed visit – not paid [NAME]

£587.64

[NAME] 2 good tiles were replaced - got a quote for £170.

£85 allowed Gutter clean and inspection £148.68 The gutters have never been cleaned, always advised in advance when they will be attending and never have turned up. Need access to clean the rear.

Disallowed in full Management fee for collecting Ground rent £64.80 The lease does not state the [NAME] can charge a fee for collecting ground rent

Disallowed in full [NAME] £290.28 [NAME] got quote for £110

£55

11

DISPUTED SERVICE CHARGES S/C YEAR ENDED [2024]

ITEM COST TENANT’S COMMENTS * LANDLORD’S COMMENTS * LEAVE BLANK (FOR THE TRIBUNAL) [NAME] £ 1892.22 [NAME] got quote for £581.54

See decision for the sum allowed

12 Window cleaning £92.04 The responsibility of cleaning windows is the [NAME] not freeholder as set out in the lease

Disallowed in full see decision for reasons FHS Risk assessment £481.44 [NAME] only has a single story communal area and got quote for £130.80 including vat

Disallowed in full Management fee for collecting Ground rent £67.20 The lease does not state the [NAME] can charge a fee for collecting ground rent

Disallowed in full [NAME] £410.64 [NAME] got quote for £110

£55 allowed

Advanced Electrical Audit

£552.24 Only necessary if a building has been flagged or there is a concern for electrical safety. The building has already had a EICR check with no concerns flagged. I requested a copy of the report and again on the invoiced it states unable to verify flat A due to no access another failed visit – not paid. Not [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] in full

Gutters clean and inspection

£146.68 The gutters have never been cleaned, always advised in advance when they will be attending and never turned up. Need access to the rear

Disallowed for the reasons set out in our decision

Fascia work

£587.64 The work has never been carried out

Allowed, the applicants half share being £249 after excluding any management fee

13

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • The tenant is entitled to challenge the reasonableness of service charges under their lease agreement.
  • The landlord must provide adequate evidence for disputed service charges under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
  • Management fees must be reasonable and communicated effectively.
  • A tenant is entitled to challenge excessive or unreasonable service charges under s.27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • A tenant is entitled to challenge service charges if the costs are not reasonably incurred or if the charges are disproportionately high.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The decision found several service charges to be excessive or unauthorised under the lease agreement.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved in the dispute over service charges.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided in favour of the tenant, ruling that certain charges were unauthorised or excessive. The reasoning was based on the terms of the lease and market quotes for services.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The decision was based on the terms of the lease agreement between the tenant and landlord.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the tenant's assertion that certain charges were not authorised by the lease and were excessive compared to market rates.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the tenant who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation may be able to challenge unauthorised or excessive service charges if they can show that the charges are not supported by the terms of their lease agreement.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Market quotes for services and the terms of the lease agreement were crucial pieces of evidence.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Decisions from the First-tier Tribunal can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is recommended to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving lease agreements and service charges.

Official source: First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.