Decision summary

MAN/00FA/LSC/2022/0101 — service charge decision

In MAN/00FA/LSC/2022/0101, decided 27 February 2025, the First-tier Tribunal considered 6 disputed service charge items at Flat 2, 106 Coltman Street, Hull HU3 2SF and found largely for the leaseholder: 6 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.

Property: Flat 2, 106 Coltman Street, Hull HU3 2SF
Decision date: 27 February 2025
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK

Managing agent named in the decision: Eagerstates Limited.

What was challenged and what the tribunal decided

ItemDemandedAllowedOutcomeGrounds
Major works (2022-23)£5,436£0Disallowed entirelyCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Works not necessary, Landlord could not evidence the cost
Management fees (2022-23)£978.48£0Disallowed entirelyCosts unreasonably incurred (s19(1)(a)), Landlord could not evidence the cost
Administration charges (2022-23)£120£0Disallowed entirelyOther grounds
Administration charges (2022-23)£243£0Disallowed entirelyOther grounds
Administration charges (2022-23)£480£0Disallowed entirelyOther grounds
Administration charges (2022-23)£360£0Disallowed entirelyOther grounds

Section 20C order: granted.

Key passages (verbatim)

“The Tribunal therefore finds that neither the estimated charges nor any actual costs (of which no evidence has been received from the Respondent) were reasonably incurred.”
On major works
“The amounts recoverable as both on account service charges in advance and actual service charges is accordingly limited to: Chimney works estimated cost £Nil Management Fee £Nil”
On management fees
“the tribunal orders that the following administration charges are extinguished: Notice of proceedings 9 February 2023 £120”
On administration charges
“DRA Referral Fee 20 February 2023 £243”
On administration charges
“DRA Correspondence Fee 20 February 2023 £480”
On administration charges
“Admin costs 20 February 2023 £360”
On administration charges
“Despite significant correspondence from the tribunal, over a long period of time, culminating in a case management hearing which the Respondent did not attend, the Respondent has provided no evidence and has been barred, by Order dated 11 February 2025, from taking any further part in the proceedings.”
Of Assethold Limited (Respondent)
“The landlord has produced no evidence in response, not even a witness statement from its managing agent nor an invoice for works undertaken.”
Of Assethold Limited (Respondent)

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.