MAN/00BR/LSC/2024/0235 — service charge decision
In MAN/00BR/LSC/2024/0235, decided 25 February 2026, the First-tier Tribunal considered 9 disputed service charge items at Flat 5, 19 Lord Street, Broughton, Salford and reached a mixed result: 3 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Flat 5, 19 Lord Street, Broughton, Salford
Decision date: 25 February 2026
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Inspired Property Management Ltd (IPM).
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Management fees (2022/23) | — | £192 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Management fees (2023/24) | — | £206.40 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Management fees (2024/25) | — | £228.80 | Reduced | Fee excessive for service delivered |
| Buildings insurance (2022/23) | — | £228.16 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2023/24) | — | £245.83 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2024/25) | — | £254.17 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2022/23) | — | £94.10 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2023/24) | — | £195.50 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2024/25) | — | £132.17 | Allowed in full | — |
Key passages (verbatim)
“The Tribunal determines that the amount payable in respect of management fees is reduced by 20%. £192 for 2022/23: This is 1/6 of £1,152 (£1,440 with a 20% reduction)”
“£206.40 for 2023/24: This is 1/6 of £3128.40 (£1,548 with a 20% reduction)”
“£228.8 for 2024/25: This is 1/6 of £1336.80 (£1,671 with a 20% reduction)”
“£228.16 for 2022/23: This is 1/6 of £1,369 (estimate of £1,250 for both Blocks)”
“£245.83. for 2023/24: This is 1/6 of £1,475 (estimate of £2,936 for both Blocks)”
“£254.17. for 2024/25: This is 1/6 of £1,525 (estimate of £3,376 for both Blocks)”
“The Tribunal found that IPM have not undertaken their managing agent's responsibilities to the standards required by RICS, in the delay in producing accounts. In fact, the accounts were only finally produced due to this application.”
“The accounts added to the continued confusion by comparing the old, estimated amounts (inclusive of 21 Lord street) with the new method of calculating the actual amounts (separating out 19 and 21 Lord street, though still including figures for 21 Lord street). In addition, there does not seem to be as yet a clear break down with a total amount payable for each block.”
“added to the delays in producing final accounts, it did contribute to the lack of transparency in decision making.”
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.