HAV/00HE/LSC/2025/0760 — service charge decision
In HAV/00HE/LSC/2025/0760, decided 11 September 2026, the First-tier Tribunal considered 13 disputed service charge items at 1 Stannum Terrace, Redruth, Cornwall, TR15 3FQ and reached a mixed result: 4 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 1 Stannum Terrace, Redruth, Cornwall, TR15 3FQ
Decision date: 11 September 2026
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2023/24) | — | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Standard not reasonable (s19(1)(b)) |
| Other charges (2024/25) | — | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Standard not reasonable (s19(1)(b)) |
| Cleaning (2023/24) | — | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Standard not reasonable (s19(1)(b)) |
| Cleaning (2024/25) | — | — | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Standard not reasonable (s19(1)(b)) |
| Other charges (2024/25) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2023/24) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2024/25) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Gardening & grounds (2023/24) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Gardening & grounds (2024/25) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2023/24) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2024/25) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2023/24) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2024/25) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“The cost of testing the fire alarms should be reduced by a percentage representing monthly rather than weekly testing. Monthly testing of the emergency lighting is not unreasonable.”
“The cost of testing the fire alarms should be reduced by a percentage representing monthly rather than weekly testing. Monthly testing of the emergency lighting is not unreasonable.”
“The per visit fee for cleaning is reasonable. The number of visits is not, and should be reduced to once per month.”
“The per visit fee for cleaning is reasonable. The number of visits is not, and should be reduced to once per month.”
“service charges referable to the FMAs are not unreasonable.”
“the use of more than one accounting code for 'communal repairs' is not unreasonable and did not lead to any unreasonable outcome.”
“departure from the scheme of accounting required by the lease was so fundamental that it was both proper and inevitable … that the FTT should raise the issue at the hearing. … The fact that [the leaseholder applicant/Respondent on appeal] may not have appreciated that the services charges were being demanded on a different basis from the lease did not require the FTT to shut its eyes to an obvious and potentially fatal irregularity.”
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.