£200k court bill for ex-banker after dust from Knightsbridge flat refurb stopped neighbours hanging laundry

The court heard the dispute arose in a Grade-II listed building in Lennox Gardens, where houses are valued at up to £40m
Leda Sara, a former banker turned interior designer and estate agent for the mega-rich, was sued by Samuel Wagner and his wife Jennifer over a mammoth five-year stop-start refurb of her £1.6m apartment in exclusive Lennox Gardens.

Leaks from a sprinkler and a defective shower tray after the building work was eventually completed also led to significant damage, with one of the ceilings in their £1.4m flat collapsing, they claimed.

After a trial at Mayor's and City County Court, Judge Stephen Hellman has now ruled in the couple's favour, awarding them over £40,000 damages and ordering Ms Sara to pay most of her neighbours' lawyers' bills , with £91,000 up front towards an estimated total of £150,000.

She will also have to pay her own legal fees.

Although the judge said she was not liable for any leaks, he said Ms Sara was responsible for the work taking so long to complete and causing her neighbours "annoyance, inconvenience, discomfort and anxiety" over such a long time.

The court heard the dispute arose in a Grade-II listed building in Lennox Gardens, one of the most exclusive garden squares in Knightsbridge, with houses there valued at up to £40m.

The houses surrounding the gardens were built around 1886, with the 1.139 acre private communal gardens in the centre laid out on the pitch of the late 19th-century Prince's Club's former Prince's Cricket Ground.

It was also reportedly where James Gilbey would meet Diana, Princess of Wales, in his apartment during their romance from the summer of 1989, as later revealed in the notorious "Squidgygate" tapes.

Ms Sara, who now runs a company focused on obtaining and managing luxury properties for "high net worth individuals," bought the apartment above Mr and Mrs Wagner's flat in 2014 and almost immediately ran into problems as she proceeded to completely strip it back to a shell.

In his evidence to the court, Mr Wagner complained of "extraordinary" amounts of "relentless" dust, which entered through windows, cracks in the ceiling and on foot from communal areas, and which meant they "couldn't hang laundry in the flat."
The work was in breach of a restriction on Ms Sara's property and was paused for some time as she negotiated a licence to complete it with the freeholder of the building.

Work resumed in March 2018 and was stipulated under the licence to be finished within eight months, but overran and was not signed off as complete until April 2019.

The Wagners complained that living beneath a stripped out shell for so long made it hard for them to keep their flat warm, while pigeons began to roost in the unoccupied flat.

They were forced to move out three times, first while works were being done, and twice again in 2019 and 2020 when leaks from a shower and sprinkler system occurred after the main job was signed off, they said.

Mr Wagner told the judge that one of the moves happened when, after seeing damp patches caused by the leaky shower above, his ceiling had collapsed in.

Ms Sara was sued for negligence in not replacing her builders and for the "nuisance" of the extended delay and the work itself, which had taken an unreasonable amount of time to be done.

The couple also claimed that delays in certifying that the leaks were fixed caused a sale of their flat to "fall through," costing them another £60,000.

Ms Sara, 50, however defended the case, with her barrister Fasiel Sadiq telling the judge that she should not be held liable for the work of third party contractors.

In her evidence, she admitted her flat was left a shell, but insisted it was watertight and that she had never seen any access points through which birds might enter.

Giving judgment, Judge Hellman exonerated her of any blame for the leaks, saying that she had passed on all complaints to her builder and had never taken on the position of "project manager."
He said that, after leaks were identified, she had taken "reasonable steps" to prevent water damage by telling her then tenant not to use the shower, adding: "In my judgment, it was reasonable for the defendant to require the contractor who installed the shower to fix the leak."
The claim for the alleged lost sale of their flat was also dismissed because there was no duty on Ms Sara to provide proof that the leaks were remedied, he said.

However, he found Ms Sara liable for delays and overrunning of the work, resulting in "annoyance, inconvenience, discomfort and anxiety" for her neighbours.

She had started the work in 2014 without having the necessary authorisation from the freeholder, resulting in the long pause, during which her neighbours had lived beneath an incomplete shell, until work resumed in 2018.

But even then, the work had taken longer than the eight months which Ms Sara's licence stipulated it must be completed in.

Mr and Mrs Wagner should not have been "exposed to the nuisance of extended works," the judge said.

"In my judgment, the works were not completed within a reasonable period and therefore became a nuisance.

"They began in July-August 2014, but paused because they were in breach of the covenant in the defendant's lease not to make alterations.

"The defendant should have obtained a licence before the works commenced.

Had she done so, no pause would have been necessary.

"During the pause, the incomplete state of the works was a nuisance.

It was one for which the defendant was directly responsible, as it was her responsibility to comply with the terms of her lease and obtain necessary authority from the landlord."
She was also liable for the extended period of works between November 2018, when the resumed work should have ended, and April 2019 when it was signed off, he added.

He awarded the couple £41,332 in damages and ordered Ms Sara to pay 80% of their lawyers' bills, with £91,000 up front towards a total of about £150,000.

She will also have to pay her own legal costs.