The charge was levied on leaseholders in order to pay for additional policing but residents argued it was unnecessary, reports Nick Clark, Local Democracy Reporter
It is “unreasonable” for Barking and Dagenham Council to charge home-owners for extra policing, a tribunal has ruled.
Residents of a council-owned block of flats in Thames View successfully challenged the “safer neighbourhood” element of the service charge levied by the town hall.
A tribunal said the council had “failed to provide any evidence” that the charge was neccessary or had provided extra police.
Residents of 47, 49, 51 and 53 Curzon Crescent challenged their service charge at a tribunal hearing last year.
The residents are leaseholders – meaning they own their flats – but pay an annual charge to the council, which owns the freehold, to manage and maintain the building.
The charge included £104 each for the council’s “safer neighbourhood” scheme between 2020 and 2024.
This pays for eight police constables to patrol areas of the borough with council-owned properties as part of the “crime and enforcement taskforce team”.
However the residents told the tribunal “they did not receive this service and it was not needed”.
The tribunal ruling, published in March, said one resident, Mr Webster, “hardly ever saw any ‘bobbies on the beat’ – certainly they were not getting any higher service than the public in general”.
It added: “He said they already paid for a community police service as part of their tax, like everyone else.”
The council responded that the service was being provided, and said this was “focused on council priorities across the borough”.
However, the ruling says the council didn’t give “specific details” on how this service was connected to the management of the building, nor “why an additional policing service was required”.
The ruling also said the council didn’t produce any contract or invoice to show the service had been provided.
A council spokesperson told the Local Democracy Reporting Service that it would not appeal the decision, which it said only affected the four properties.
However they said the charge “represents good value for money for tenants and leaseholders”.
The spokesperson said the eight police officers worked shift rotas from 10am to 10pm and focus on priorities set by the council based on “intelligence we receive from the public, the local authority and police intelligence”.
They said: “The council is sorry to learn that these leaseholders are concerned about the levy paid by council tenants and leaseholders for the provision of the crime and enforcement taskforce team.
“The focus of the taskforce is to support council priorities including the safety of its tenants, its assets and relevant council led enforcement activity.
“The charge, being a nominal charge for each leaseholder and tenant, represents good value for money for tenant’s and leaseholders.”
The leaseholders also successfully challenged a charge for the building’s TV aerial, and reduced their charge for the building insurance premium.
The premium for the block had increased from £893.04 in 2022 to £2,464.40 in 2024.
However, the tribunal ruled that the way the council calculated the charge for each leaseholder was “not reasonable”.
It said this was because the council’s insurance provider charged a premium for its whole property portfolio – which includes more expensive, taller buildings.
The tribunal considered that the council should split the premium according to building type rather than by bedroom.
The council spokesperson said the town hall was “surprised” by this ruling as a previous tribunal had ruled in its favour on this in an earlier case.
They said: “It is not possible to allocate insurance cost on a per-block basis. To do so would require a formal assessment by the insurance provider, however, they are only prepared to provide portfolio wide quotations.
“The council cannot break this down into per-block quotations without straying into areas in which it has no specific expertise and would risk unfairness to leaseholders.”
