CAM/26UK/LSC/2025/0615 — service charge decision
In CAM/26UK/LSC/2025/0615, decided 6 January 2026, the First-tier Tribunal considered 19 disputed service charge items at Hackworth Court, 7 Bedford Street, Watford WD24 5FX and reached a mixed result: 11 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Hackworth Court, 7 Bedford Street, Watford WD24 5FX
Decision date: 6 January 2026
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Gateway (from 29 January 2025); previously Pinnacle.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cleaning (2022-2023) | £570 | £384 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Cleaning (2022-2023) | £147.44 | £0 | conceded | — |
| Other charges (2022-2023) | £960 | £0 | conceded | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022-2023) | £392.12 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Historic neglect, Works not necessary |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022-2023) | £714 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Historic neglect, Works not necessary |
| Reserve fund contributions (2022-2023) | £1,314.95 | £955.68 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Other grounds |
| Lifts (2022-2023) | — | £545.26 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Reserve fund contributions (2023-2024) | £1,284.45 | £955.68 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Other grounds |
| Other charges (2023-2024) | £11,957.88 | £8,218.07 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Lifts (2023-2024) | £2,824.43 | £545.26 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Repairs & maintenance (2023-2024) | £150 | £150 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2023-2024) | £912 | £348 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Repairs & maintenance (2023-2024) | £377.14 | £377.14 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2023-2024) | £240 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2023-2024) | £96 | £96 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2023-2024) | £739.20 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2023-2024) | £234 | £0 | conceded | — |
| Cleaning (2023-2024) | £2,363.40 | £2,363.40 | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2023-2024) | £198 | £198 | Allowed in full | — |
Key passages (verbatim)
“The Respondent was unable to give any details of the works executed on 13 January 2023 save for the baldest description in the invoice ('professional carpet clean'). By contrast, the Applicants have a comparable quotation was based on detailed information given to the contractor.”
“This item of communal cleaning was conceded by the Respondent in the Scott Schedule.”
“there were 2 duplicate invoices of £800+ VAT (£960) raised.”
“We determine that the landlord had not made adequate arrangements and planning for waste disposal in the first instance... We therefore allow the Applicants to raise a set-off. The cost of £392.12 is disallowed.”
“In our determination this was more than a teething problem, and the Applicants are entitled to have this sum disallowed for the same reasons as under Line 6.”
“we do not consider a sum for VAT which is not yet payable as a tax (and might never be) to be part of an 'appropriate amount'... We also do not consider a 12% management fee to be part of an appropriate amount by way of reserve.”
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.