1-39 Storey Court, St John's Wood Road, London NW8 8QX
LON/00BK/LSC/2019/0012 · service charges · Westminster · decided 18 Apr 2019
The tribunal decided that the proposed cost of replacing the Tower windows with uPVC windows and repairing the brickwork, estimated at £102,394 plus VAT with surveyor's costs, is payable as a service charge and reasonably incurred, and refused the landlord's section 20C application.
| Outcome | Payable as demanded |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Refused |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | Landlord or management company |
| Freeholder / landlord | Orbit Group Limited |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block, 31 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2018, 2019 |
| Items in dispute | major works |
| Items disallowed or reduced | none stated |
| Total demanded | £102,394 |
| Total found payable | not stated as one figure |
| Fees or costs ordered | none stated |
Read from the decision automatically: a regular-expression pass, then a language model whose every value must quote the decision word for word. Compare with the original.
What the decision says
- flats n
Storey Court consists of 31 retirement flats on St John's Road.
- freeholder
Applicant : Orbit Group Limited (“the Landlord”)
- outcome
would be payable as a service charge by the leaseholders of Storey Court and such costs would be reasonably incurred
- total demanded
the sum of £102,394 plus VAT together with surveyor's costs of £1,350 plus VAT
- s20c
The application made pursuant to Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, s.20C is dismissed.
The passages each figure was read from, verbatim. People's names are replaced with [name].
The original
If this decision relates to your home and you'd like it removed from this site, email hello@rentrisecheck.uk with the address or the case reference (removal requests).
Spotted an error on this page? Email hello@rentrisecheck.uk with what is wrong; the decision's reference goes in the subject.
Past decisions are not a prediction. Each tribunal decides on the evidence in front of it.