MAN/00BL/LSC/2023/0037 — service charge decision
In MAN/00BL/LSC/2023/0037, decided 2 November 2024, the First-tier Tribunal considered 7 disputed service charge items at 55, Provincial House, 6, Nelson Square, Bolton BL1 1LH and reached a mixed result: 3 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 55, Provincial House, 6, Nelson Square, Bolton BL1 1LH
Decision date: 2 November 2024
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: J H Asset Management Ltd.
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Utilities (2021) | — | — | Reduced | Not payable under the lease, Other grounds |
| Utilities (2022) | — | — | Reduced | Not payable under the lease, Other grounds |
| Utilities (2023) | — | — | Reduced | Not payable under the lease, Other grounds |
| Repairs & maintenance (2021) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Repairs & maintenance (2022) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
| Major works (2021) | £2,700 | £2,700 | Allowed in full | — |
| Cleaning (2022) | — | — | Allowed in full | — |
Key passages (verbatim)
“The tribunal view is that only the consumption relating to the common parts should be apportioned in that way. The consumption within any particular flat should be what determines the amount of those bills.”
“The tribunal view is that only the consumption relating to the common parts should be apportioned in that way. The consumption within any particular flat should be what determines the amount of those bills.”
“The tribunal view is that only the consumption relating to the common parts should be apportioned in that way. The consumption within any particular flat should be what determines the amount of those bills.”
“In the absence of any particular challenge to individual invoices the Tribunal is entitled to take the view that they are, on their face, genuine and relate to work done. There is nothing to suggest they are unreasonable.”
“In the absence of any particular challenge to individual invoices the Tribunal is entitled to take the view that they are, on their face, genuine and relate to work done. There is nothing to suggest they are unreasonable.”
“There is reference to one particular invoice for roofing work, for a sum of some £2.700.00. There is nothing to suggest it is unreasonable.”
“The Tribunal has had some difficulty in assessing the merits of the respective cases parties. The Applicant limits herself to basic assertions that the charges to which challenges are made are unreasonable and/or excessive with limited insight provided as to how such unreasonableness may be ascertained, or against what concrete criteria they may be assessed.”
“This has not assisted the Tribunal in reaching a speedy decision, necessitating it conducting its own analysis of individual invoices to establish if the heads of charge in the relevant annual service charge accounts were supported by relevant invoices.”
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.