AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·12 February 2026

First-tier Tribunal Rules on Service Charge Payability

Case No.

📌 In brief

In a recent case, tenants successfully challenged the payability of service charges under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The First-tier Tribunal ruled in their favour, setting a precedent for future disputes over service charges.

⚖️ Legal holding

Tenants are entitled to challenge the payability of service charges under section 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

Topics

service chargestenancy disputes

Provisions

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.27A

📖 Technical summary

The First-tier Tribunal ruled on the payability of service charges under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal ruled on a challenge to the payability of service charges under section 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, involving several tenants and a landlord. The decision was made by Judge A Davies and J Faulkner, FRICS, on 26 January 2026, with corrections on 24 February 2026.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case References : MAN/00CX/LSC/2024/0234

Property : [NAME], GRATTAN ROAD, BRADFORD

Applicants : [redacted] [COMPANY] (2) [COMPANY] (3) [NAME] (4) [NAME] (5) [RESPONDENT] (6) [NAME]

Respondent: [redacted] : Payability of service charges, section 27A Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

Tribunal Members : Judge A Davies J Faulkner, FRICS

Date of Decision Date of Correction

: :

26 January 2026 24 February 2026

CERTIFICATE Pursuant to paragraph 50 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013

The Schedule to the Decision made on 26 January 2026 is amended in respect of the lease apportionment and consequent insurance contributions payable for Flat 417 for the period 1 April 2020 to 28 February 2021 and for the year ending 28 February 2022, as shown in the Amended Schedule attached to this certificate.

AMENDED SCHEDULE Party/flat no. Lease apportionment Share of insurance costs 1.4.20 to 28.2.21 £28,955.17

Share of insurance costs 1.3.21.to 28.2.22 £33,962.91 [COMPANY] 209 417 507 510 601 604 607 610 701 710 718 801 815

1.216605 1.35635 1.068640 1.068640 1.134402 1.068640 1.068640 1.068640 1.134402 1.068640 1.348130 1.150843 0.945335

352.27 392.73 309.43 309.43 328.47 309.43 309.43 309.43 328.47 309.43 390.35 333.23 273.73

413.19 460.66 362.94 362.94 385.28 362.94 362.94 362.94 385.28 362.41 457.86 390.85 321.06 [NAME] 308 405 406 416 512 612 616 711 715

0.739827 0.904233 0.772709 1.068640 0.969996 1.019318 0.969996 0.805590 0.756268

214.22 261.82 223.74 309.43 280.86 295.15 280.86 233.26 218.98

251.27 307.10 262.43 362.94 329.44 346.19 329.44 273.60 256.85 [NAME] 503 508

0.863132 0.780929

249.92 226.12

293.14 265.23 [COMPANY] 415 517 518 613

0.943399 0.943399 0.943399 0.943399

273.16 273.16 273.16 273.16

320.41 320.41 320.41 320.41

[NAME] [NAME] 811 812

0.986436 0.986436

285.62 285.62

335.02 335.02

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

Allowed7 cases

Allowed in Part3 cases

Dismissed2 cases

A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

Tenant challenges the reasonableness of service charges under section 27A.
Tenant challenges unreasonable service charge costs under section 27A.
Tenant challenges excessive service charges under section 27A.
Tenant challenges the legality of service charges under section 27A.

❌ Tends to be rejected

Tenant challenges the reasonableness of service charges but fails to provide sufficient evidence.
Tenant challenges the reasonableness of service charges but the court finds them reasonable.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The decision allowed the challenge to the payability of service charges under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

Who was involved?

Several tenants and a landlord were involved in the dispute.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided in favour of the tenants because the service charges were deemed unreasonable under the Act.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, specifically section 27A, was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was that the service charges were unreasonable and therefore not payable.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the tenants who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation may have grounds to challenge unreasonable service charges.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence showing the reasonableness of the service charges was crucial.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Decisions from the First-tier Tribunal can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.

Official source: First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) — headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.