HAV/29UH/LSC/2025/0643 — service charge decision
In HAV/29UH/LSC/2025/0643, decided 25 November 2025, the First-tier Tribunal considered 15 disputed service charge items at 7 Roland House, Harris Place, Tovil, Maidstone, Kent and reached a mixed result: 7 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 7 Roland House, Harris Place, Tovil, Maidstone, Kent
Decision date: 25 November 2025
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Principle Estate Management.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buildings insurance (2022-23) | £5,068.63 | £5,068.63 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2023-24) | £23,092 | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2022-23) | £799 | £799 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2023-24) | £2,000 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2024-25) | £2,000 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2025-26) | £2,394 | £2,394 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2022-24) | £600 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Other charges (2024-26) | £600 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
| Reserve fund contributions (2022-23) | £11,000 | £11,000 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2023-24) | £25,500 | £25,500 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2024-25) | £37,000 | £37,000 | Allowed in full | — |
| Reserve fund contributions (2025-26) | £39,500 | £39,500 | Allowed in full | — |
| Legal & professional costs (2024-25) | £2,081 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Legal & professional costs (2025-26) | £294 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Administration charges (2022-23) | £216 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Costs unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)) |
Section 20C order: partial.
Key passages (verbatim)
“the payments to FMPLC were for services rendered in the course of arranging and administering the insurance for the estate, and these payments were properly recoverable by way of service charges under the terms of the Lease.”
“the Tribunal determines that the full insurance charges are costs 'reasonably incurred' and of an amount that is reasonable, and the Applicant is liable to pay his proportion of those costs for all of the years in question.”
“the actual cost of £799 for revaluation (in October 2022) was 'reasonably incurred' and the appropriate share of that amount was clearly payable by the Applicant (i.e. £33.29).”
“it was not reasonable to charge £2,000 as a payment 'on account' for a valuation which was not required until the latter part of 2025.”
“Given that no valuation was due to take place during this year, the Tribunal determines that the charge is unreasonable and it should not have been payable by the Applicant.”
“This appears to be an actual cost which was (in the course of that service charge year) reasonably incurred, and as an advance payment the Tribunal determines that Mr. Francis' share of the total cost (at £99.75) was reasonable and payable.”
“The Tribunal takes the view that better communication and transparency could have improved the situation between the Applicant and the Respondent, and that the PMP should have been disclosed to Mr. Francis (and other leaseholders if they so requested) from the outset.”
“if a decision was taken to depart from the recommendations made by the PMP, the managing agents should have been ready to explain and justify both their revised figures and their different approach to scheduled works.”
“The Tribunal finds that the Respondent and their agents unreasonably withheld the PMP from the Applicant, whilst incorrectly claiming that it had been disclosed to him.”
“the Tribunal is also satisfied that the costs of the proceedings have increased as a result of the Respondent's failure to comply with Directions and their requests for extensions of time, despite ample time being allowed for submission of their case and documentation.”
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.