CAM/12UD/LCR/2025/0003 — service charge decision
In CAM/12UD/LCR/2025/0003, decided 8 May 2026, the First-tier Tribunal considered 11 disputed service charge items at 5 & 6 North End, Wisbech, Cambridgeshire and found largely for the leaseholder: 11 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 5 & 6 North End, Wisbech, Cambridgeshire
Decision date: 8 May 2026
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Eagerstates Limited.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2017) | — | £4,808.26 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2018) | — | £5,269.15 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2019) | — | £11,842.20 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2020) | — | £8,237.27 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2021) | — | £6,569.96 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2022) | — | £20,058.04 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2023) | — | £13,809.12 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Section 20B 18-month time limit |
| Other charges (2024) | — | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Demand formally invalid |
| Buildings insurance (2021) | £4,907.60 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Leaseholder evidence insufficient, Not payable under the lease |
| Major works (2022) | £5,666.40 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Leaseholder evidence insufficient |
| Legal & professional costs (2025) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“2017 Total relevant costs recoverable: £4,808.26”
“2018 Total relevant costs recoverable: £5,269.15”
“2019 Total relevant costs recoverable: £11,842.20”
“2020 Total relevant costs recoverable: £8,237.27”
“2021 Total relevant costs recoverable: £6,569.96”
“2022 Total relevant costs recoverable: £20,058.04”
“the tribunal received late e-mails from Ms Tuplin which do not appear to have been prepared with sufficient care or to reflect careful reading of previous decisions or the draft decision.”
“On review of the documents attached to Ms Tuplin's e-mail of 30 April 2026, it appears these are confused and/or attempting to re-argue the case.”
“If the Applicants attempt again to argue with these figures, they may be at risk of the tribunal deciding to review its decision to give these clarifying additional determinations in these proceedings at all.”
“It does appear unreasonable conduct for the Respondent to fail to comply with orders/directions in a way which frustrates the purpose of the jurisdiction under section 94 of the 2002 Act (and limits the other determinations which the tribunal can make), in general but all the more so when it appears that despite the decisions and payments noted above the Respondent has at the same time been threatening/seeking forfeiture and attempting to claim a further £76,516.34 in relation to Flat 5f, and seeking to claim other charges from the leaseholder of Flat 6c.”
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.