LON/00AJ/LSC/2025/0862 — service charge decision
In LON/00AJ/LSC/2025/0862, decided 4 February 2026, the First-tier Tribunal considered 11 disputed service charge items at 23 Featherstone Court, Featherstone Road, UB2 5GP and found largely for the landlord: 0 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 23 Featherstone Court, Featherstone Road, UB2 5GP
Decision date: 4 February 2026
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Network Homes / FirstPort.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2017/18) | £1,129.08 | £1,129.08 | Allowed in full | Leaseholder evidence insufficient |
| Legal & professional costs (2018/19) | £32.68 | £32.68 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2018/19) | £36.94 | £36.94 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2019/20) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2020/21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Gardening & grounds (2020/21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2020/21) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2022/23) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2023/24) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2023/24) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2017/18) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: refused.
Key passages (verbatim)
“The tribunal finds the sums demanded by the respondent are correctly calculated in the sum of £1,129.08 i.e. 12 x £94.00 and are payable by the applicant.”
“including legal fees of £32.68 ... the tribunal accepts on the balance of probabilities and in view of the unchallenged evidence of the respondent, that these modest sums were reasonably incurred”
“FirstPort service charge accounts in the sum of £36.94. The tribunal accepts on the balance of probabilities ... that these modest sums were reasonably incurred”
“The tribunal finds all sums paid by the applicant have been credited to her account for this service charge year.”
“services continued to be provided and in some instances increased and that in any event, there was a continuing obligation to make payment for these services, even if provided in an alternative format due to COVID pandemic restrictions.”
“services continued to be provided and in some instances increased and that in any event, there was a continuing obligation to make payment for these services, even if provided in an alternative format due to COVID pandemic restrictions.”
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.