A group of Andover residents have won a court battle against their housing provider after it tried to force them to pay for its legal battle against them over “unnecessary" work.

As previously reported, residents of flats in Kingsway Gardens had been locked in a battle with Aster over the replacement of asphalt on their balconies across their buildings, which could results in fees of over £20,000 per flat. After residents took them to a tribunal, judges ordered Aster to reduce the fees it would charge, though agreed the costs in principle.

However, the tribunal ordered that Aster should pay the costs of the resident’s legal battle, as well as its own, which the company appealed, wanting to charge its legal costs to the residents. Following further defeats, Aster confirmed to the Advertiser it will no longer pursue this action.

The saga began in 2015, when Aster announced plans for remedial works, resulting in costs of over £2.07 million for the building, which would be charged to leasehold residents of the building. At the time, documents it sent said it was planning to coat, rather than replace, the asphalt.

However, by the time bills were sent out, it had decided to replace the asphalt instead, a cost of £360,000 not including management fees. After attempting to charge this fee to residents’ service charges, Aster were challenged in court for not properly consulting residents. The tribunal subsequently decided that while the company had acted “in good faith”, a full replacement was “unnecessary” and had not been properly consulted on.

As a result, it ordered the overall cost of the work to be reduced, while telling Aster that it had to pay the legal fees of residents, the costs of hiring an expert, and its own legal fees. However, residents still faced the charges for the replacement they didn't want.

The conditions imposed on Aster were appealed to an upper tribunal, and then the Court of Appeal, by the company, who attempted to have those orders repealed. In both instances, their appeal was dismissed, the latest instance being on May 7.

In its verdict, the Court of Appeal said that the courts were entitled to make Aster pay these fees, as it was allowing them to charge the costs of the asphalt replacement.

It said: “In seeking dispensation, Aster was asking for an indulgence and so could fairly be expected to bear the tenants' costs of the application.”

Aster have now confirmed that they will not seek to appeal the case higher to the Supreme Court.

A spokesperson for Aster said: “In light of the outcome of the Upper Tier tribunal we will not be progressing the application any further. We’re currently working through the implications of this ruling and will be in contact with the legal representative acting on behalf of leaseholders shortly.”