CAM/26UC/LIS/2022/0003 — service charge decision
In CAM/26UC/LIS/2022/0003, decided 18 October 2022, the First-tier Tribunal considered 4 disputed service charge items at 35 High Street, Kings Langley, Hertfordshire and found largely for the landlord: 0 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 35 High Street, Kings Langley, Hertfordshire
Decision date: 18 October 2022
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buildings insurance (2020-2021) | £578.72 | £578.72 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2021-2022) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Utilities (2020-2021) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Utilities (2021-2022) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: refused.
Key passages (verbatim)
“The process by which the Respondent has sought to insure the property has been rational and, has led to a reasonable outcome... I am so satisfied.”
“The approach adopted by the Respondent, going out to market through a broker and organising insurance with an insurer of repute in the ordinary course of business is reasonable.”
“I find that the sums claimed in respect of water and sewerage have been reasonably incurred and are reasonable in amount.”
“The sums are payable in accordance with the proportions expressly negotiated under the Lease.”
“The Applicants were invited to seek appropriate advice from an RICS qualified surveyor as to the appropriate level of insurance payable in respect of the demised premises but did not do so.”
“The Respondent has been successful and has been put to cost in defending a challenge which is misconceived for the reasons given in this determination.”
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.