River Gardens Heating Deficit – Tribunal Disallows £198k Heat Charges
First-tier Tribunal rules historic heat network charges irrecoverable; managing agent fee cut by 20%
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) issued its final decision in January 2026 in a case concerning the River Gardens development in Greenwich, finding that “Historical Tariff Deficit” heating charges totalling £198,986 were not lawfully recoverable from residents, and applying a 20% deduction to the managing agent Rendall & Rittner’s fees for the period in which the deficit arose.
The decision affects charges and fees totalling approximately £277,000 across a development of around 600 flats.
The case has since been reported nationally, including in The Guardian, which described the attempted recovery of the deficit as “plainly wrong” and highlighted the wider lack of protection historically faced by residents connected to communal heat networks.
Update: May 2026
In May 2026, The i Paper reported that the 56 leaseholders who brought the Tribunal case had still not received refunds or corrected With Energy accounts.
The article also reported that Rendall & Rittner ceased acting as managing agent at River Gardens on 1 May 2026, without the affected leaseholders having received any communication from it concerning the Tribunal’s decision or the 20% management fee deduction.
In response to The i Paper, With Energy stated that it had provided billing services in support of the management company, was not responsible for purchasing gas or setting tariffs, and was engaged with the management company to seek clarity on next steps. Rendall & Rittner stated that the Tribunal findings related to a case brought against its former client and were subject to ongoing legal discussions.
Background
The disputed charges related to a deficit that accumulated on the site’s communal heat network during 2022–23, following a failure to update resident tariffs in line with rising wholesale gas prices. Individual residents received additional bills ranging from around £50 to over £1200, despite having already paid their energy charges at the contracted rates.
The heat network at River Gardens is billed under the With Energy brand, which is the billing and operations arm of Hemiko, a UK heat network operator and investor that has submitted evidence to Parliament on the expansion of district heating. During the relevant period the development was managed by Rendall & Rittner, a RICS-regulated managing agent responsible for more than 90,000 homes nationwide, and overseen by Greenwich Wharf Management Company Ltd (GWMC), which the Tribunal recorded as being controlled by the freeholder.
Residents challenged the charges on multiple grounds, including defective demands, misattribution of costs, failure to reflect government energy subsidies (EBRS/EBDS), alleged double counting, and commission earned on gas procurement.
The Tribunal’s Findings
The Tribunal did not need to decide every argument advanced. Instead, it found that the charging route itself failed as a matter of law.
In particular, the Tribunal held that:
The historic tariff deficit charges were not recoverable as service charges under the leases.
The demands issued for the deficit were statutorily defective, lacking required information under landlord and tenant legislation.
The costs did not appear in the audited service charge accounts, which the Tribunal found to be final and binding.
As a result, the Tribunal determined that none of the historic tariff deficit charges were lawfully payable by residents.
Debarment and management failings
GWMC was debarred from defending the proceedings after persistently failing to comply with Tribunal directions. Debarment is a serious procedural sanction and entitled the Tribunal to determine the case without considering a defence from the Respondent.
The decision also records admissions by Rendall & Rittner concerning its role in managing the heat network. In evidence cited by the Tribunal, a Rendall & Rittner Area Director stated:
“Neither Sukh nor myself, to the best of my knowledge, have been asked to prepare a heating draft business plan – I have no idea what this is and would not be comfortable preparing one when heating networks / distribution is not my expertise…”
The Tribunal disallowed £1,208.79 in costs relating to threatened disconnection, locksmith attendance and warrant applications, and applied a 20% reduction to Rendall & Rittner’s management fee for the period from 1 March 2022 to 31 December 2023. On the relevant service charge account figures, that 20% reduction equates to approximately £77,894.
Scope and effect of the decision
While the ruling formally applies only to the leaseholders who joined the case, the Tribunal’s reasoning is based on the way service charges were structured and accounted for across the development.
The Tribunal also granted Section 20C protection to all leaseholders within the scope of the application, preventing the landlord from passing its Tribunal costs to them through the service charge.
The recovery of sums already paid by residents was outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction and remains a separate matter. As reported by The i Paper in May 2026, the 56 named leaseholders were still awaiting corrected accounts and refunds several months after the Tribunal determined that the historic tariff deficit charges were not lawfully payable.
Wider context
The case also highlights how difficult it can be for residents to challenge problems that affect hundreds of leaseholders. In April 2024, i News reported on the use of non-disclosure conditions in complaints to The Property Ombudsman, including in relation to the same River Gardens heat charges. Clive Betts MP, then Chair of the Housing Select Committee, described the practice as “outrageous”, warning that it can prevent wider awareness of issues affecting other residents.
The case comes as Ofgem begins regulating heat networks, but important gaps remain for leaseholders, with historic charging disputes still likely to fall to the Tribunal rather than the regulator.
The Tribunal’s decision is publicly available on the HM Courts & Tribunals Service website here.
Selected national and industry coverage
The Guardian (Money) – ‘Plainly wrong’: London flat dwellers fight shock £200,000 heating bill
The i Paper (Money), 21 May 2026 – ‘We’re leaseholders who fought a £200,000 energy bill and won. We want our refunds’
Sunday Times – The flat-owners facing £60k bills to upgrade communal boilers
The i Paper – Revealed: Property watchdog tells homeowners not to disclose compensation
PropertyWire – Greenwich residents win tribunal over £200,000 heat network bill
The Mirror – Furious London flat residents forced to pay £200k energy bill after agent’s mistake
For any queries, please feel welcome to contact me at matheson@gmail.com.
Many thanks,
Calum