CAM/26UH/LSC/2022/0038 — service charge decision
In CAM/26UH/LSC/2022/0038, decided 29 February 2024, the First-tier Tribunal considered 3 disputed service charge items at 18 Yarmouth Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire and reached a mixed result: 3 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 18 Yarmouth Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire
Decision date: 29 February 2024
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Major works (2020) | £6,048.66 | £5,119.63 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Other charges (2020) | — | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Management fees (2020) | — | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Fee excessive for service delivered, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the final costs of £53,081.72 should be reduced by the share of the louvered window and the costs of the door, bringing the total down to £52,089.47”
“we would remove the charge of £214.39 for the louvered window to the bin store and also the £777.86 to supply and install a door. It cannot be of benefit to the tenants to have a new window and door to a room that they can no longer use.”
“The Council adds a 6% management charge to this which we do not think is appropriate given the problems that there have been in finally setting that these costs which have taken until October of 2023 to be finalised.”
“We were not helped by the local authority's inability to edit their bundle of documents and to instead produce papers running to over 1,500 documents as well as of course the hearing bundle itself, which in part duplicated some of the papers before us.”
“it is worrying that a clause appears to have been omitted presumably from a number of leases.”
“The Council adds a 6% management charge to this which we do not think is appropriate given the problems that there have been in finally setting that these costs which have taken until October of 2023 to be finalised. We do not understand why there was this major delay.”
“Given the delays in producing the documentation it seems a bit rich to expect Mr Ackerman to have settled this by 17th November.”
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.