MAN/00BY/LSC/2024/0610 — service charge decision
In MAN/00BY/LSC/2024/0610, decided 13 February 2026, the First-tier Tribunal considered 30 disputed service charge items at Apartments 402 & 502 Beetham Tower, 111 Old Hall Street, Liverpool and found largely for the landlord: 0 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: Apartments 402 & 502 Beetham Tower, 111 Old Hall Street, Liverpool
Decision date: 13 February 2026
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
Managing agent named in the decision: Berkeley Shaw Real Estate Limited (previously Keppie Massie Residential Limited).
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other charges (2017) | £199.86 | £199.86 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2017) | £175.17 | £175.17 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2018) | £3,093.92 | £3,093.92 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2018) | £3,022.54 | £3,022.54 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2018) | £809.74 | £809.74 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2018) | £809.74 | £809.74 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2019) | £3,055.91 | £3,055.91 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2019) | £2,942.95 | £2,942.95 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2019) | £2,715.63 | £2,715.63 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2019) | £2,715.63 | £2,715.63 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2020) | £3,127.38 | £3,127.38 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2020) | £3,000.33 | £3,000.33 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2020) | £1,993.53 | £1,993.53 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2020) | £1,993.53 | £1,993.53 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2021) | £3,801.78 | £3,801.78 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2021) | £3,664.65 | £3,664.65 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2021) | £2,367.16 | £2,367.16 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2021) | £2,367.16 | £2,367.16 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2022) | £4,117.22 | £4,117.22 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2022) | £3,615.24 | £3,615.24 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2022) | £2,696.62 | £2,696.62 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2022) | £2,696.62 | £2,696.62 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2023) | £4,643.43 | £4,643.43 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2023) | £4,045.98 | £4,045.98 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2023) | £2,824.86 | £2,824.86 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2023) | £2,824.86 | £2,824.86 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2024) | £4,599.84 | £4,599.84 | Allowed in full | — |
| Other charges (2024) | £4,105.28 | £4,105.28 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2024) | £2,507.59 | £2,507.59 | Allowed in full | — |
| Buildings insurance (2024) | £2,507.59 | £2,507.59 | Allowed in full | — |
Key passages (verbatim)
“the Tribunal is satisfied that the Applicant has demonstrated that the services changes were properly incurred and are reasonable in the circumstances”
“the Tribunal is satisfied that the Applicant has demonstrated that the services changes were properly incurred and are reasonable in the circumstances”
“the Tribunal is satisfied that the Applicant has demonstrated that the services changes were properly incurred and are reasonable in the circumstances”
“the Tribunal is satisfied that the Applicant has demonstrated that the services changes were properly incurred and are reasonable in the circumstances”
“the Tribunal is satisfied that the Applicant has demonstrated that the insurance changes were incurred and are reasonable in the circumstances”
“the Tribunal is satisfied that the Applicant has demonstrated that the insurance changes were incurred and are reasonable in the circumstances”
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.