CAM/26UK/LIS/2023/0020 — service charge decision
In CAM/26UK/LIS/2023/0020, decided 7 April 2025, the First-tier Tribunal considered 13 disputed service charge items at Ground Floor Flat, 8 St Mary's Road, Watford, WD18 0EF and found largely for the leaseholder: 13 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Ground Floor Flat, 8 St Mary's Road, Watford, WD18 0EF
Decision date: 7 April 2025
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2010) | £6,450.30 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Demand formally invalid, No Section 21B summary of rights, Section 20B 18-month time limit, Not payable under the lease |
| Repairs & maintenance (2011) | £2,200.30 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Demand formally invalid, No Section 21B summary of rights, Section 20B 18-month time limit, Not payable under the lease |
| Repairs & maintenance (2012) | £2,500.50 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Demand formally invalid, No Section 21B summary of rights, Section 20B 18-month time limit, Not payable under the lease, Works not necessary |
| Repairs & maintenance (2013) | £2,200 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Demand formally invalid, No Section 21B summary of rights, Section 20B 18-month time limit, Historic neglect |
| Repairs & maintenance (2014) | £1,950 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Demand formally invalid, No Section 21B summary of rights, Section 20B 18-month time limit, Historic neglect |
| Repairs & maintenance (2015) | £2,925 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Demand formally invalid, No Section 21B summary of rights, Section 20B 18-month time limit, Works not necessary |
| Repairs & maintenance (2016) | £2,200 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Demand formally invalid, No Section 21B summary of rights, Section 20B 18-month time limit, Other grounds |
| Repairs & maintenance (2017) | £2,075 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Other grounds |
| Repairs & maintenance (2018) | £2,300 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Other grounds |
| Repairs & maintenance (2019) | £1,675 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Other grounds |
| Repairs & maintenance (2020) | £2,300 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, No Section 20 consultation, Demand formally invalid, No Section 21B summary of rights, Section 20B 18-month time limit |
| Other charges (2021) | £1,200 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, No Section 20 consultation, Demand formally invalid, No Section 21B summary of rights, Section 20B 18-month time limit |
| Other charges (2022) | £1,200 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, No Section 20 consultation, Demand formally invalid, No Section 21B summary of rights, Section 20B 18-month time limit |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the Tribunal finds that this is not a valid service charge demand as no notice of the Respondent's rights and obligations in compliance with section 21B of the 1985 Act was served on the Respondent. In any event, the Tribunal accepts the Respondent's evidence that no valid service charge demand was received by him.”
“the Tribunal finds that the Applicant did not incur any repair or maintenance costs for the year ended 2011. The Applicant did not provide any evidence to show that any work was completed.”
“The Tribunal accepts the evidence of the Respondent that the Tribunal decision in 2015 stated that the wall had been removed and that the Respondent reinstated the wall in 2016. The Tribunal therefore does not accept that the Applicant incurred any charge for replacing the wall in 2012.”
“the Tribunal accepts the Respondent's observation that the Tribunal's decision dated 15 December 2015 found that the Property was in disrepair. This therefore corroborates the fact that there was a lack of maintenance taking place at the Property prior to that Tribunal's decision.”
“The Respondent's evidence to the Tribunal was that this work did not take place and the Applicant has failed to produce any evidence to the Tribunal in support of her claim.”
“the Tribunal is not satisfied as to the accuracy of the Applicant's service charge records given that the Applicant included a charge for a replacement wall in the 2012 service charge amount she claimed.”
“The Tribunal did not find it a reasonable request to seek to apply for permission to produce a witness statement four minutes prior to the start of the hearing.”
“The Tribunal is concerned to note that the Respondent paid £800 for this period, however the Applicant has failed to account for this payment.”
“the Tribunal is not satisfied as to the accuracy of the Applicant's service charge records given that the Applicant included a charge for a replacement wall in the 2012 service charge amount she claimed.”
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.