CAM/12UD/LIS/2022/0015 — service charge decision
In CAM/12UD/LIS/2022/0015, decided 4 December 2023, the First-tier Tribunal considered 3 disputed service charge items at 64A Hammonds Drive, Peterborough and found largely for the leaseholder: 3 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 64A Hammonds Drive, Peterborough
Decision date: 4 December 2023
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Firstport Property Services Ltd.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Utilities (2019) | £393.70 | £346.13 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Apportionment error |
| Utilities (2020) | £339.17 | £342.92 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Apportionment error |
| Utilities (2021) | £478.91 | £421.11 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Apportionment error |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the service charge in respect of water charges for the year ending 2019 shall be £346.13 and there shall a credit of £65.64 pertaining to the under-recovery charge”
“the service charge in respect of water charges for the year ending 2020 shall be £342.92 and there shall a credit of £14.22 pertaining to the under-recovery charge”
“the service charge in respect of water charges for the year ending 2021 shall be £421.11 and there shall a credit of £54.45 pertaining to the under-recovery charge”
“The Respondent did not comply with the directions; instead it wrote to the Tribunal, via its solicitors, to indicate it would concede the sums challenged by the Applicant (£134.41 and £101.61).”
“The Respondent called Ms Karen Lacey and Mr Izzo to attempt to assist the Tribunal, but neither could explain the calculations in the Respondent's Statement of Case, despite their witness statements deposing to the fact they believed the contents of the Statement of Case were true.”
“The Respondent will not be viewed sympathetically by this Tribunal if no such steps have been taken, and the Applicant is forced to bring a s.27A application of his own in the future, making the same points as he does herein.”
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.