Decision summary

CHI/21UG/LIS/2021/0006 — service charge decision

In CHI/21UG/LIS/2021/0006, decided 14 June 2021, the First-tier Tribunal considered 12 disputed service charge items at 37 Park Road, Bexhill on Sea, East Sussex and reached a mixed result: 1 item was reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.

Property: 37 Park Road, Bexhill on Sea, East Sussex
Decision date: 14 June 2021
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK

What was challenged and what the tribunal decided

ItemDemandedAllowedOutcomeGrounds
Buildings insurance (2020)£242.86Allowed in full
Management fees (2020)Allowed in full
Repairs & maintenance (2020)Allowed in full
Major works (2020)£1,803.43Allowed in full
Major works (2020)£492Allowed in full
Major works (2020)£536.57Allowed in full
Buildings insurance (2021)Allowed in full
Management fees (2021)Allowed in full
Repairs & maintenance (2021)Allowed in full
Repairs & maintenance (2021)£200£200Allowed in full
Repairs & maintenance (2021)£142.85£142.85Allowed in full
Major works (2021)£2,142.85£250ReducedNo Section 20 consultation

Key passages (verbatim)

“Annual service charge costs of £600 were reasonable. This represented the Respondent's 1/7th contribution for the estimated cost of buildings insurance (£1,700), the actual cost of management fees (£1,000) and the estimated cost of repairs and renewals (£1,500).”
On buildings insurance
“Annual service charge costs of £600 were reasonable. This represented the Respondent's 1/7th contribution for the estimated cost of buildings insurance (£1,700), the actual cost of management fees (£1,000) and the estimated cost of repairs and renewals (£1,500).”
On management fees
“Annual service charge costs of £600 were reasonable. This represented the Respondent's 1/7th contribution for the estimated cost of buildings insurance (£1,700), the actual cost of management fees (£1,000) and the estimated cost of repairs and renewals (£1,500).”
On repairs & maintenance
“the Applicant had validly carried out statutory consultation under section 20 of the Act. It also found the cost of the major works to be reasonable on the basis that the Applicant had adopted the lowest estimate for the works.”
On major works
“the Applicant had validly carried out statutory consultation under section 20 of the Act. It also found the cost of the major works to be reasonable on the basis that the Applicant had adopted the lowest estimate for the works.”
On major works
“the Applicant had validly carried out statutory consultation under section 20 of the Act. It also found the cost of the major works to be reasonable on the basis that the Applicant had adopted the lowest estimate for the works.”
On major works

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.