HAV/21UC/LSC/2025/0754 — service charge decision
In HAV/21UC/LSC/2025/0754, decided 20 July 2026, the First-tier Tribunal considered 11 disputed service charge items at Flat 6, 125 Langney Road, Eastbourne, East Sussex and found largely for the landlord: 1 item was reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 6, 125 Langney Road, Eastbourne, East Sussex
Decision date: 20 July 2026
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Langney Road Management Company Limited.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Utilities (2024-25) | £170.55 | £170.55 | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2024-25) | £114.41 | £114.41 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2024-25) | £2.56 | £2.56 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2024-25) | £20.13 | £20.13 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2024-25) | £51.25 | £51.25 | Allowed in full | — |
| Lifts (2024-25) | £71.77 | £71.77 | Allowed in full | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2024-25) | £71.77 | £71.77 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2024-25) | £302.06 | £302.06 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2024-25) | £0 | £0 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2024-25) | £0 | — | Disallowed entirely | — |
| Other charges (2025-26) | £1,209.23 | £1,209.03 | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: refused.
Key passages (verbatim)
“The Tribunal finds that the sum of £170.55 is reasonable and that the Applicant is liable to pay this amount.”
“The Tribunal finds that the sum of £114.41 is reasonable and that the Applicant is liable to pay this amount.”
“The Tribunal finds that the sum of £2.56 is reasonable and that the Applicant is liable to pay this amount.”
“Absent evidence that the costs are unreasonable, the Tribunal finds that the sum of £20.13 is reasonable and that the Applicant is liable to pay this amount.”
“The Tribunal finds that the sum of £51.25 is reasonable and that the Applicant is liable to pay this amount.”
“The Tribunal finds that the sum of £71.77 is reasonable and that the Applicant is liable to pay this amount.”
“The Hearing Bundle is significantly defective. The Applicant failed to include any of the Directions referred to above nor, more importantly, a copy of the original application and appendices.”
“the Tribunal generally gave the Applicant's evidence less weight than that of Mr Connor. That is because the Applicant's statements of case were not always consistent with the written evidence in the Hearing Bundle.”
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.