Disputed Service Charge Invoice

fabfor

I'm a leaseholder in dispute with the freeholder concerning what I consider to be the unreasonable replacement of two windows at a cost of nearly £10k.
I have objected in writing and have refused to pay the invoice until my queries are addressed by the freeholder (waiting two years; withholding payment is my way of forcing a response).
In the meantime, I have continued to pay other annual estimated service charge invoices in full and in advance. However, the last actual service charge was less than the estimate but instead of offering a refund or allocating the surplus to the next year's invoice (as per leasehold agreement), the freeholder is using the surplus to reduce the disputed invoice 'debt'.
I would be grateful for advice, please, on:
    1. Whether a disputed invoice is legally binding before, or after, the dispute has been resolved. In other words, do they have the legal right to use 'my' surplus funds unilaterally, to reduce a 'debt' that I deny.
    2. Since the lease stipulates the allocation of any surplus to the next year's service charge, do they have the legal right to do otherwise.
Any helpful and constructive advice would be very welcome. Thanks.

Comms69

You must not like your flat? Because i suspect you're about to have your lease withdrawn...

bouicca21

What is your share of the £10k?  Should a section 20 have been issued?  Was it?

knightstyle

You have the right to be consulted about charges for running or maintaining the building if you have to pay more than:

• £250 for planned work
• £100 per year for work and services lasting more than 12 months

There are steps your landlord must follow when they consult you, known as a ‘Section 20’ consultation. There’s a limit on how much you have to pay if you haven’t been consulted properly - contact Leasehold Advisory Service for advice.

So did the leaseholder do this?

fabfor

Thanks for the responses. Yes, a section 20 was issued (for just under an estimated £2k). My share is half. Thanks also for the leasehold advisory service lead; I'll contact them.

There are other considerations which I won't mention for now because they would not help to clarify my two main queries - for which any suggestions would be most welcome.

princeofpounds

1. Yes, the disputed service charge needs to be paid, assuming it has been correctly demanded. You 'pay under protest' and then apply to the first tier tribunal to challenge the reasonableness of the charge.

2. If the lease stipulates how they must deal with the surplus, they must act in accordance with that. However, given that you are in deficit concerning the disputed charge, the surplus you think exists probably does not exist. Although this can all turn on details in the language in your lease agreement, which you have not provided.

Leasehold Advisory is your friend! Read their materials, speak to them.

https://www.lease-advice.org/files/2016/09/service-charge-dispute-resolution-flowchart2.pdf

Out of interest, what is your objection - the cost or the need for replacement?

hazyjo

I'd be inclined to "pay under protest" then dispute it, or you may find the bailiffs turn up, with costs added.

fabfor

princeofpounds said:

1. Yes, the disputed service charge needs to be paid, assuming it has been correctly demanded. You 'pay under protest' and then apply to the first tier tribunal to challenge the reasonableness of the charge.

2. If the lease stipulates how they must deal with the surplus, they must act in accordance with that. However, given that you are in deficit concerning the disputed charge, the surplus you think exists probably does not exist. Although this can all turn on details in the language in your lease agreement, which you have not provided.

Leasehold Advisory is your friend! Read their materials, speak to them.

https://www.lease-advice.org/files/2016/09/service-charge-dispute-resolution-flowchart2.pdf

Out of interest, what is your objection - the cost or the need for replacement?

Thanks for responding.

I've just filled in an enquiry form on the L.A.S website.

It's a Local Authority landlord/freeholder and I have been trying to get answers since the Section 20 was issued in February 2017, without a single response - with the exception of their Collections department, and even Collections have not been able to elicit a response from Repairs! I responded to their Letter of Claim last December and I'm still awaiting their further response! Non-payment is my only means of getting some answers right now.

My intention is to take this to arbitration but, in preparation, I need to know what their answers to my questions are - for all I know their actions might be perfectly reasonable (highly unlikely, I think) and I would have wasted both time and money.

Almost all of the (timber) windows needed replacing when the section 20 was issued, so their tenant and I petitioned for uPVC double glazing throughout. There was no response to the petition but, eighteen months later, the two windows were replaced at a total  cost of nearly £10k (up from 2k).

If that's reasonable, I need them to explain how before accepting it, especially when the poor condition of the remaining windows are taken into account.

Thanks again for your responses.

Jenni_D

silvialong said:

well))))))

Huh? (Marked as spam).