CAM/26UE/LSC/2023/0045 — service charge decision
In CAM/26UE/LSC/2023/0045, decided 2 June 2025, the First-tier Tribunal considered 15 disputed service charge items at Flat 6, Herons Court, Radlett, Herts WD7 7FA and reached a mixed result: 7 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 6, Herons Court, Radlett, Herts WD7 7FA
Decision date: 2 June 2025
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Trent Park Properties.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Repairs & maintenance (2020-2024) | £879.20 | £879.20 | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2021) | £5,029.80 | — | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation |
| Major works (2021-2022) | £2,870 | £1,800 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Management fees (2020) | — | — | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation, Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Management fees (2021) | — | — | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation, Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Management fees (2023) | — | — | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation, Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Legal & professional costs (2023) | £485 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Administration charges (2023) | £1,500 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges (2023) | £2,985 | £2,985 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2023-2024) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2023) | £4,025 | £4,025 | Allowed in full | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2022-2023) | £840 | £840 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2022-2023) | £750 | £750 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2023) | £100 | £100 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2019-2020) | £600 | £600 | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: refused.
Key passages (verbatim)
“The Tribunal determines that these costs were reasonably incurred and reasonable in amount. The Respondent had indeed chosen a course of action which led to a reasonable outcome.”
“we determine that the Applicants' contribution to the works which consisted of the carpeting should be capped at £250.”
“we determine that a reasonable cost for the works is the original price of £1800. It follows that a reasonable amount for the Applicants to pay is 8.04% of £1800, namely £144.72.”
“The Applicants' proportion in relation to items 4, 16 and 27 is reduced by 5% to £274.97, £206.23 and £381.90 respectively.”
“The Applicants' proportion in relation to items 4, 16 and 27 is reduced by 5% to £274.97, £206.23 and £381.90 respectively.”
“The Applicants' proportion in relation to items 4, 16 and 27 is reduced by 5% to £274.97, £206.23 and £381.90 respectively.”
“The Tribunal noted by its letter of 6 December 2024 "the enormous amount of information sent by Ms Cooper has overwhelmed the Tribunal's resources".”
“We agree that the Applicants' documentation has been excessive and disproportionate, as the Procedural Judge has already found.”
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.