LON/00BD/LSC/2025/0623 — service charge decision
In LON/00BD/LSC/2025/0623, decided 24 December 2025, the First-tier Tribunal considered 11 disputed service charge items at 37–42 Castelnau Gardens, London, SW13 8DU and reached a mixed result: 5 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 37–42 Castelnau Gardens, London, SW13 8DU
Decision date: 24 December 2025
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: HML PM Limited.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Major works (2022) | £4,450 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Poor standard of work |
| Major works (2022) | £15,060 | £11,295 | Reduced | Poor standard of work |
| Major works (2022) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2022) | £410 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Poor standard of work |
| Major works (2022) | £380 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Poor standard of work |
| Other charges (2022) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2022) | — | — | Reduced | Poor standard of work |
| Other charges (2022) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2022/23) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2023/24) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Management fees (2024/25) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
Section 20C order: granted.
Key passages (verbatim)
“The painting if done properly should not have deteriorated so quickly. The fact that the decoration needs to be completely redone so soon means that no part of the cost should be recoverable.”
“The tribunal is satisfied based on these that the works were not done to a reasonable standard. However, photographs have not been provided all windows to which works were done, so we cannot ascertain whether this affected only limited windows or all. On this basis, the tribunal concludes that it is appropriate to reduce the cost of these works by one quarter.”
“There is insufficient evidence to support the Applicants' contention that the works to replace the flat roof caused the leaks. It cannot therefore conclude on the balance of probabilities that these works were not of a satisfactory standard.”
“The tribunal considers that testing of the crown mouldings would have revealed the issue that led to the masonry collapse … it concludes on the balance of probabilities that the testing of the crown moulding was either not carried out or not done properly.”
“The tribunal reviewed the evidence and concluded that these items were in an unacceptable state if done 12 months before. It considered that the works may not have been done at all, such was their condition.”
“The contract price needs to be viewed as a whole. As a result, the tribunal determines that the amount charged was reasonable.”
“the tribunal considers that this dispute could have been avoided if the Respondent had engaged more with the Applicants; they had legitimate concerns and were frustrated by the approach and responses they received.”
“there clearly have been failings in the works, especially in relation to the internal decoration and the windows and doors repairs.”
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.