HAV/21UD/LSC/2025/0836 — service charge decision
In HAV/21UD/LSC/2025/0836, decided 23 October 2026, the First-tier Tribunal considered 16 disputed service charge items at 36A Wellington Square, Hastings, East Sussex TN34 1PN and reached a mixed result: 9 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 36A Wellington Square, Hastings, East Sussex TN34 1PN
Decision date: 23 October 2026
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Findleys of Cooden (previously Francis Property Estate Management Limited / FPE).
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Repairs & maintenance (2023-24) | £1,866 | £1,500 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Cleaning (2023-24) | £198 | £198 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2023-24) | £684 | £684 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2023-24) | £600 | £600 | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2024-25) | £2,052 | £684 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Repairs & maintenance (2024-25) | £1,671 | £1,000 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Buildings insurance (2024-25) | £1,818 | £1,500 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Cleaning (2024-25) | £0 | £0 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2024-25) | £1,200 | £1,200 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2025-26) | £3,482 | £2,250 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Management fees (2025-26) | £1,350 | £1,200 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered, Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Repairs & maintenance (2025-26) | £1,936 | £1,500 | Reduced | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2025-26) | £600 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2025-26) | £600 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost, Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Legal & professional costs (2025-26) | £624 | £624 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2025-26) | £1,200 | £1,200 | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“in the light of the Respondent's failure to produce any evidence to support the claimed expenditure finds £1,500 to be a reasonable sum.”
“the Tribunal finds the modest cost of £198 for the year (equating to £16.50 per month) not unreasonable.”
“The Tribunal finds the management fee of £684 per year (£114 per flat) not unreasonable in these circumstances.”
“the total service charge of £3,711 for the year ending 31 March 2024 together with a contribution of £600 to the reserve fund is reasonable and payable by the leaseholders (total £4,311).”
“the Tribunal finds it not to be reasonable given the admission by the Respondent that FPE were failing and the lack of explanation for the tripling of the previous year's management fee. The Tribunal, therefore, finds only £684 to be reasonable.”
“in the light of the Respondent's admission that FPE were failing in their duties, the Applicant's submission that no maintenance or repairs were carried out, the Tribunal finds the complete lack of evidence supporting the claimed expense surprising. On balance, the Tribunal finds only £1,000 to be reasonable and payable.”
“the Respondent failed to respond to the directions or attend.”
“The Respondent failed to comply with the Tribunal's directions.”
“Although Judge Lumby found the excuse inadequate”
“it has not produced any evidence of invoices or payments made in respect of these items, which is surprising given the nature of this application.”
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.