HAV/00HH/LSC/2025/0667 — service charge decision
In HAV/00HH/LSC/2025/0667, decided 30 March 2026, the First-tier Tribunal considered 8 disputed service charge items at 32 Clarendon Court, Stitchill Road, Torquay, Devon and reached a mixed result: 4 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 32 Clarendon Court, Stitchill Road, Torquay, Devon
Decision date: 30 March 2026
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: FirstPort Group Limited (formerly Blenheim Estate and Asset Management).
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buildings insurance (2021-22) | — | £229.17 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Buildings insurance (2022-23) | — | £236.11 | Reduced | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Buildings insurance (2025-26) | — | — | Reduced | Not payable under the lease |
| Buildings insurance (2023-24) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2021-22) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2022-23) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2023-24) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2025-26) | — | — | Disallowed entirely | Leaseholder evidence insufficient |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the service charges payable by the buildings insurance payable by the Applicant are reduced to £229.17 (1/36 of £8,250.00) for the service charge year 25th March 2021 to 24th March 2022”
“£236.11 (1/36 of £8,500.00) for the service charge year 25th March 2022 to 24th March 2023”
“reduced by the cost of directors' and officers' insurance, so by £6.20 (1/36 of £223.32)”
“the Tribunal accepts that the budget sum provided by the Respondent of £17,755.00 was reasonable on the information known to the Respondent at time”
“the service charges demanded from the Applicant year by year to be paid into the reserve fund for the years involved in these proceedings have been payable as demanded”
“the service charges demanded from the Applicant year by year to be paid into the reserve fund for the years involved in these proceedings have been payable as demanded”
“The Tribunal finds that the Respondent was too laissez-faire about the insurance cost and did too little to ensure that the premium was at a reasonable level. Simply leaving matters entirely to the agent and/or broker and taking no, at least discernible, interest in the matter was not sufficient to be a rational approach and to achieve a reasonable outcome.”
“the Tribunal does not consider Mr Scholey's choice of language to have been the best”
“On the evidence provided, the reserve fund had been used as a sort of general slush fund. There had apparently been insufficient service charge funds for expenditure and so the Respondent had taken sums from the reserve fund to meet the costs.”
“The Respondent's short statement and document confirming the Respondent's statement (which the Tribunal will term collectively as Mr Scholey's statement) [147-150] lacked any statement of truth, with potential effect on the weight to be given to it - and rendering that document also not compliant with the Directions.”
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.