CAM/22UJ/LSC/2025/0655 — service charge decision
In CAM/22UJ/LSC/2025/0655, decided 11 February 2026, the First-tier Tribunal considered 9 disputed service charge items at 57 Ackroyd House, Edinburgh Gate, Harlow, Essex CM20 2UH and reached a mixed result: 0 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 57 Ackroyd House, Edinburgh Gate, Harlow, Essex CM20 2UH
Decision date: 11 February 2026
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Rosetree Estates Limited.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cleaning (2023/2024) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2023/2024) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2024/2025) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2024/2025) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Lifts (2024/2025) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2024/2025) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2025/2026) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Administration charges (2024) | — | £0 | conceded | — |
| Administration charges (2025) | — | £0 | conceded | — |
Section 20C order: partial.
Key passages (verbatim)
“Window cleaning had been budgeted for, but not undertaken... the Respondent did not incur any window cleaning costs that year so no 'final' service charge was payable on that account.”
“As to fire door maintenance and inspection, costs were greater than budgeted due to the rapidly increasing cost of this sort of work, which the Tribunal appreciated and accepted.”
“The Tribunal concluded that the budget was plainly within a reasonable range and was payable in full.”
“The anticipated Expenses for internal and external repairs and maintenance, lift maintenance, waste clearance and bin store cleaning appeared reasonable.”
“lift maintenance, waste clearance and bin store cleaning appeared reasonable”
“The Respondent has sought to limit costs by providing some inspection services 'in-house', where possible, which is to be lauded.”
“The Tribunal was unclear why the discussion that took place at the hearing could not have been handled directly between the parties.”
“the Respondent's 'formal' success should be recognised, although tempered by the fact that it should have been possible for the hearing to have been avoided entirely with a dose of understanding by each party.”
“The Tribunal found this was an admirable approach to leasehold management, the likes of which it witnesses far too seldom.”
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.