HAV/00MS/LSC/2025/0649 & others — service charge decision
In HAV/00MS/LSC/2025/0649 & others, decided 17 November 2025, the First-tier Tribunal considered 10 disputed service charge items at 116A and 116B Graham Road, Southampton SO14 0AZ and reached a mixed result: 6 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 116A and 116B Graham Road, Southampton SO14 0AZ
Decision date: 17 November 2025
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2024-25) | £309.21 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Other grounds |
| Other charges (2024-25) | £360.83 | £87.50 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost, No Section 20 consultation |
| Other charges (2024-25) | £336.84 | £250 | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation |
| Management fees (2024-25) | £160.08 | £160.08 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2025-26) | £1,531.44 | £250 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost, No Section 20 consultation, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2025-26) | £370.21 | £250 | Reduced | No Section 20 consultation |
| Other charges (2025-26) | £242.46 | £242.46 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2025-26) | £58.92 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Management fees (2025-26) | £320.16 | £320.16 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2025-26) | £236.73 | £236.73 | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“This item should not have been charged at all. The contribution is therefore reduced to £0 per flat.”
“There is no evidence before the Tribunal that any works of this kind were done at all, and therefore the Tribunal found that a reasonable cost under this heading would be £175 in total, taken from the figure of £149.09 in the 2022-2023 accounts with an uplift for inflation. In the circumstances the amount payable is determined at £87.50 per flat.”
“There is no evidence of any consultation, so the amount claimable is restricted to £250 per flat.”
“The management charge was found to be reasonable. £160.08 per flat is payable.”
“This amount, without any invoice or evidence to support the estimated cost, was found to be excessive and unreasonable for a property of this nature. Unless the correct Section 20 procedure is followed, the amount claimable is restricted to £250 per flat in any event.”
“The estimated cost of contract servicing exceeds £250 per flat, so the amount claimable is restricted to that sum unless and until the Section 20 consultation procedure is followed.”
“the Tribunal found that evidence as to the qualifying long-term agreements was vague and imprecise, with no documentary record presented of any Notice or consultation.”
“Hyde is such a large association that it appears that some of their charges are generic rather than being appropriate to the individual property, and therefore the costs cannot all be said to be 'reasonably incurred'.”
“Mr. Mark Brown, the Service Charge Officer who responded to Mr. Bond's letter, apparently had no knowledge of this particular property and he had limited information to give.”
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.