HAV/00ML/LSC/2024/0642 — service charge decision
In HAV/00ML/LSC/2024/0642, decided 16 July 2025, the First-tier Tribunal considered 9 disputed service charge items at 84 Southover Street, Brighton, East Sussex BN2 9UE and reached a mixed result: 8 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 84 Southover Street, Brighton, East Sussex BN2 9UE
Decision date: 16 July 2025
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: KSD Support Services Ltd.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cleaning (2017) | — | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Legal & professional costs (2017) | — | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2017) | £438.33 | £321.67 | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2018) | — | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Legal & professional costs (2018) | — | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Repairs & maintenance (2018) | £7,507.63 | £250 | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation |
| Cleaning (2019) | — | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease |
| Legal & professional costs (2019) | — | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Repairs & maintenance (2019) | £293.33 | £250 | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“The Tribunal has concluded, relying on the Lease plan, there are no internal common areas in the building. Therefore, it determines that cleaning costs are not payable by the Applicant.”
“The Respondent has failed to comply with the Tribunal direction and supply any form of accounts, so the accounting charge is also disallowed.”
“The tribunal determines that the Applicant is liable to pay service charges of £321.67 to the Respondent for 2017.”
“The Tribunal disallows the costs for cleaning and accounting for the same reasons as it disallowed them for 2017.”
“The Tribunal disallows the costs for cleaning and accounting for the same reasons as it disallowed them for 2017.”
“Respondent can recover £250 from the Applicant towards general estate repairs is which the maximum contribution which can be recovered from a lessee unless the landlord has complied with the Service Charge (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003.”
“The Respondent failed to comply with the Tribunal directions. Although it has sent two emails to the Applicant, one of which was copied to the Tribunal, the Applicant alleged that the content was misleading.”
“The Respondent has failed to explain the sum carried forward on the 2017 demand despite the property having been owned by Chris Gargan who is part owner of the freehold. Having examined the Applicant's evidence, the Tribunal agrees.”
“The Tribunal has seen no evidence showing that the Respondent complied with this provision. If it did not, the Applicant would be entitled to withhold payment of service charges unless and until the Respondent complies.”
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.