Decision summary

CAM/26UE/LWS/2020/0001 — service charge decision

In CAM/26UE/LWS/2020/0001, decided 2 March 2021, the First-tier Tribunal considered 14 disputed service charge items at 1 Mayfield Court, London Road, Bushey, Hertfordshire WD23 2NN and found largely for the landlord: 6 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.

Property: 1 Mayfield Court, London Road, Bushey, Hertfordshire WD23 2NN
Decision date: 2 March 2021
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK

Managing agent named in the decision: Hightown Housing Association.

What was challenged and what the tribunal decided

ItemDemandedAllowedOutcomeGrounds
Buildings insurance (2018/19)£165.72£154.86ReducedLandlord could not evidence the cost
Management fees (2018/19)£279.96£220ReducedFee excessive for service delivered
Reserve fund contributions (2018/19)£424.32£424.32Allowed in full
Repairs & maintenance (2018/19)£821.52£821.52Allowed in full
Utilities (2018/19)£205.08£205.08Allowed in full
Other charges (2018/19)£25.73£25.73Allowed in full
Buildings insurance (2019/20)£169.44£153.93ReducedLandlord could not evidence the cost
Management fees (2019/20)£279.96£220ReducedFee excessive for service delivered
Utilities (2019/20)£232.56£232.28ReducedOther grounds
Reserve fund contributions (2019/20)£426£425.96Allowed in full
Repairs & maintenance (2019/20)£845.16£150.55ReducedOther grounds
Ground-rent-adjacent charges (2018/19)£230£230Allowed in full
Ground-rent-adjacent charges (2019/20)£230£230Allowed in full
Legal & professional costs (2018/19)£185£185Allowed in full

Key passages (verbatim)

“She accepted that no details or evidence of this had been provided to us and that we would determine the figure of £154.86 based on the documents provided.”
On buildings insurance
“taking into account these points and the less than helpful information provided to leaseholders, we consider that a management fee of £220, but no higher, was reasonably incurred.”
On management fees
“Since the reserve fund contribution had not been challenged by the Respondents in their defence, and based on the evidence provided, we consider that the claimed contribution of £424.32 is reasonable.”
On reserve fund contributions
“since these claims are not challenged by the Respondents in their defence, and based on the evidence provided, we consider that these costs were reasonably incurred.”
On repairs & maintenance
“since these claims are not challenged by the Respondents in their defence, and based on the evidence provided, we consider that these costs were reasonably incurred.”
On utilities
“we allow … the balancing payment of £25.73”
On other charges
“In our assessment, the quality of information provided to leaseholders was not good. It seeks to cover the basics, but is very difficult to follow and does not give enough information to enable calculation of the service charges being demanded, or not in a way that corresponds with those service charges, as explained below.”
Of Hightown Housing Association (quality of leaseholder information)

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.