CHI/00ML/LBC/2022/0017 — service charge decision
In CHI/00ML/LBC/2022/0017, decided 4 January 2023, the First-tier Tribunal considered 8 disputed service charge items at First Floor Flat, 48 Harrington Road, Brighton, East Sussex BN1 6RF and reached a mixed result: 7 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: First Floor Flat, 48 Harrington Road, Brighton, East Sussex BN1 6RF
Decision date: 4 January 2023
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2022) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Repairs & maintenance (2020-2022) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Buildings insurance (2022) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Gardening & grounds (2022) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Other grounds |
| Other charges (2020-2022) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2022) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2022) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Other grounds |
| Legal & professional costs (2019-2022) | £7,871.68 | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
Key passages (verbatim)
“The Tribunal determines that the Respondents are not in breach of Cause 3(4) and Fifth Schedule 5. The Applicant has failed to provide any substantive evidence, photographic or otherwise.”
“The Tribunal finds that the Respondents are not in breach of the covenants of their lease. It must be the case, that leaks occur in converted flats for various reasons, just because leaks manifest themselves is not necessarily a breach.”
“In light of the fact there is no evidence from the Insurance Company, the Tribunal has little option but to find that the Respondent has not breached the relevant covenants of the lease.”
“it is therefore apparent that any former breach has now been remedied by the Respondent and no breach of covenant currently exists.”
“This Tribunal agrees with these conclusions and on the balance of the evidence submitted it can find no breach of covenant.”
“The Respondents are therefore in breach of Clause 3(9)”
“In the earlier decision in 2017 Judge Whitney gave a stark warning to the parties that they should really try, whatever the Tribunals determination to put matters behind them. This advice has obviously been unheeded. This is now the third hearing at this Tribunal within five years. The Tribunal would certainly urge the parties to reach a resolution and a mutually beneficial way forward.”
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.