The leaseholders of a flat have been awarded more than £21,000 in damages over long-running problems with damp.

Graham and Dee Worsley claimed the management company that owns the freehold to Carrick Court in Port St Mary had breached its contract by failing to keep the building in good repair.

They alleged that Carrick Court Management Ltd failed in that duty over a number of years so that water penetrating from outside entered the flat and caused interior damp on the inside of the walls of the kitchen and the lounge.

The Worsleys also alleged the damp got so bad that the flat could not continue to be sub-let.

They took their case to the high court seeking damages totalling £21,450 for the cost of internal repairs, lost rent for the period when the premises were vacant pending repairs together with interest and professional fees expended in identifying the cause of the damp.

Carrick Court Management defended the claim, arguing the Worsleys had not received consent to sub-let the flat and the responsibility to repair interior plasterwork rested with the lease-holders irrespective of the cause of the problem.

They said the claimants had failed to allow them access to the flat to inspect the alleged damage and identify the source of any water ingress.

And they argued that the state of the building due to its age and dilapidation when they took over Carrick Court from developer in 2005 meant that there were other water ingress problems suffered by other lease-holders who had carried out internal repairs at their own cost.

They said the management company was owned collectively by the residents who had voted not to contribute to the internal repairs of the flat.

The claimants represented themselves at the civil hearing last month while Carrick Court Management Ltd was represented by its chairman and director John Halliday.

The Worsleys did not commission a structural survey before they bought the flat in 2006 for an elderly relative to live in.

High Bailiff John Needham found the damp was primarily the result of water ingress through poor maintenance which should have been the responsibility of the defendant. He rejected the claim that the Worsleys had no permission to sub-let. He awarded £4,823 for repairs, £14,250 for lost rent, £413 in interest and £2,264 for professional fees.