MAN/00CZ/LSC/2021/0056 — service charge decision
In MAN/00CZ/LSC/2021/0056, decided 6 November 2023, the First-tier Tribunal considered 3 disputed service charge items at 71, Hazel Grove, Cowlersley Lane, Linthwaite, Huddersfield HD7 5TQ and reached a mixed result: 3 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.
Property: 71, Hazel Grove, Cowlersley Lane, Linthwaite, Huddersfield HD7 5TQ
Decision date: 6 November 2023
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK
What was challenged and what the tribunal decided
| Item | Demanded | Allowed | Outcome | Grounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reserve fund contributions (2015) | £1,800 | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Other charges (2016) | £2,084.26 | — | Disallowed entirely | Landlord could not evidence the cost |
| Legal & professional costs (2019) | £504.61 | £0 | Disallowed entirely | Not payable under the lease, Section 20B 18-month time limit |
Key passages (verbatim)
“A failure to provide a satisfactory account is not necessarily helpful to Applicants who have failed to pay their contribution. They establish a point, but not any entitlement to return of funds.”
“The Tribunal, on the information available, is unable to answer the first of those questions satisfactorily in the Applicant's favour.”
“the certificates are not within the expenditure envisaged with Clause 4(f) and has not been properly incurred.”
“Such explanation that has been forthcoming on behalf of the Respondent has frankly shed little light upon the situation, other than to suggest that a greater separation between the service charge accounts and the management company accounts might have been advisable.”
“A failure to provide a satisfactory account is not necessarily helpful to Applicants who have failed to pay their contribution.”
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.