CHI/00HB/LBC/2023/0011 — service charge decision
In CHI/00HB/LBC/2023/0011, decided 13 September 2023, the First-tier Tribunal considered 12 disputed service charge items at First & Second Floor Maisonette, 53 Ashley Hill, Bristol, BS7 9BE and reached a mixed result: 3 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: First & Second Floor Maisonette, 53 Ashley Hill, Bristol, BS7 9BE
Decision date: 13 September 2023
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
Key passages (verbatim)
“This was a breach of clause 8.1 in that regardless of whether historically there had been a roof light in that position, when the lease was granted, it was not there, there were tiles. Mr Walker therefore made a structural alteration and cut into a structural part of the Building.”
“Therefore the first breach that we determine is that of the hole used to accommodate the white pipe seen on page 111 of the bundle, being the furthest to the right of the entrance door.”
“There was no evidence that the hole for this pipe was not already in situ by the date of the lease and it appears that it might well have been in order to service the bathroom. Therefore this breach is not made out.”
“It appears to the Tribunal this is also a new hole to facilitate the move of the kitchen from the rear to the front... indicating that a new hole has been formed or the original hole has been enlarged. Therefore we determine that there is a breach of paragraph 8.1 in creating this hole.”
“the Tribunal determines that the creation of both of these holes in the wall were a breach of paragraph 8.1.”
“in the absence of an application for consent, all of these alterations were a breach of paragraph 8.2.”
“The Tribunal was not impressed with the submissions given by Mr Walker on this issue. He seemed too ready to make a positive and clear assertions of fact in his favour, when it was clear that was not accurate.”
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.