Decision summary

MAN/00FA/LUS/2023/0001 — service charge decision

In MAN/00FA/LUS/2023/0001, decided 12 December 2024, the First-tier Tribunal considered 9 disputed service charge items at Flats 1 & 2, 106 Coltman Street, Hull and found largely for the leaseholder: 9 items were reduced or disallowed. Full decision on GOV.UK below.

Property: Flats 1 & 2, 106 Coltman Street, Hull
Decision date: 12 December 2024
Full decision: Read on GOV.UK

Managing agent named in the decision: Eagerstates Limited.

What was challenged and what the tribunal decided

ItemDemandedAllowedOutcomeGrounds
Buildings insurance (2023)£2,113.38ReducedLandlord could not evidence the cost
Utilities (2023)£1,235.77£372.42ReducedOther grounds
Cleaning (2023)£240£72.33ReducedOther grounds
Major works (2023)£7,688.88£0Disallowed entirelyWorks not necessary, Landlord could not evidence the cost
Repairs & maintenance (2023)£474£0Disallowed entirelyLandlord could not evidence the cost
Repairs & maintenance (2023)£498£0Disallowed entirelyLandlord could not evidence the cost
Legal & professional costs (2023)£1,074£0Disallowed entirelyLandlord could not evidence the cost
Other charges (2023)£144£0Disallowed entirelyLandlord could not evidence the cost
Management fees (2023)£604.80£182.26ReducedOther grounds

Key passages (verbatim)

“the Tribunal accepts that it is possible that the costs of an insurance premium and brokers fee referred to in the 2023 account may have been incurred before 21 April 2023... subject only to Assethold providing forthwith sufficient evidence”
On buildings insurance
“the Tribunal accepts that some electricity will have been used by the common parts within the premises between 1 January and 21 April 2023... the Tribunal has decided to allow and apply a pro-rata figure based on a daily apportionment”
On utilities
“Any charge for cleaning the normal domestic bins evidenced in the Street view photographs must be highly dubious. Nevertheless, for the present purposes, the Tribunal has decided to allow and apply a pro-rata figure”
On cleaning
“without any proper evidence to support the inclusion in the 2023 account of a charge for Chimney Stack works, the Tribunal finds that these charges were not incurred.”
On major works
“with no evidence works of being done, invoiced, or paid for, the Tribunal also finds that the charges included in the 2023 account under the headings 'decorate fire cupboard'... were not incurred before the acquisition date.”
On repairs & maintenance
“with no evidence works of being done, invoiced, or paid for, the Tribunal also finds that the charges included in the 2023 account under the headings... 'front door decorate'... were not incurred before the acquisition date.”
On repairs & maintenance
“none of the exhibited service charge demands comply with the Service Charge Demand regulations. The Service Charge Demand regulations are very clear and have existed in their present form for over a decade. They do not allow for partial compliance. Regulation 3 explicitly confirms that the summary which must accompany a demand for payment must contain the prescribed statements. Parts of the form of summary repeatedly used by Assethold are not properly legible, contain inaccuracies, are confusingly laid out, and are misleading in their content”
Of Assethold Limited / Eagerstates Limited
“it further follows that, without the service charges having been properly demanded, the use of Debt Recovery Agency to claim £6678.51 from Mr Zaoral's mortgage provider, the Birmingham Midshires, was wholly unjustified”
Of Assethold Limited
“the inclusion in the 2023 account of a charge for an insurance valuation, first mentioned to the flat owners only after the acquisition date, appears to be a blatant attempt to wrongly misappropriate trust monies.”
Of Assethold Limited / Eagerstates Limited
“in the absence of any proper response or evidence from Assethold the Tribunal has come to the inescapable conclusion that it is prevaricating and is unwilling and/or unable to provide the required information”
Of Assethold Limited

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.