CHI/21UD/LBC/2023/0022 — service charge decision
In CHI/21UD/LBC/2023/0022, decided 18 December 2024, the First-tier Tribunal considered 8 disputed service charge items at Flat 4, 18 Warrior Gardens, St Leonard-on-Sea, East Sussex and reached a mixed result: 4 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 4, 18 Warrior Gardens, St Leonard-on-Sea, East Sussex
Decision date: 18 December 2024
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: FPE Management.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
Key passages (verbatim)
“The evidence of Ms Mori, even with the care that she had undoubtedly taken, was not strong enough to demonstrate that there had been music played by the Respondent at a sufficient level to objectively constitute nuisance or annoyance under the provisions of the Lease.”
“the Tribunal finds on balance that there was banging noise as alleged and that noise had emanated from the Respondent's Property.”
“the Tribunal is content that there were instances of DIY producing noise which affected Ms Mori and/or other residents to a sufficient extent to amount to nuisance and/or to annoyance in or around October 2021”
“the evidence received at the hearing failed to prove a lack of carpet to the floors of the living room and bedroom from April 2021 and ongoing and hence there was no breach demonstrated.”
“The Applicant failed to make out its case on this element on the evidence presented to the Tribunal.”
“the Tribunal determines that the hanging of a mat was breach of clause 10 of Part I of the Third Schedule, although on a one-off occasion only.”
“The Tribunal found that some of the Respondent's evidence, in particular in writing and especially initially, was simply untrue and some was maintained until other evidence demonstrated it to be untrue and then changed. The same applied to an extent to Mr McLaughlin given their effectively shared positions. That was disappointing.”
“The Respondent in her statement contended in her witness statement Ms Mori to be "vindictive and petty" and to be lying. The Tribunal did not agree with any of that and is unimpressed by that use of language and by other criticism of Ms Mori for her efforts to demonstrate noise.”
“Neither was the Tribunal much impressed by the otherwise somewhat aggressive and critical tenor of the Respondent's witness statement, or in some instances that of Mr McLaughlin.”
“The Tribunal found the Respondent's case to be an attempt to concoct a good reason for access which was simply not correct and quite plainly so in light of the photographic evidence.”
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.