1-46 Tower House Close, Cuckfield, West Sussex RH17 5ES
CHI/45UG/LSC/2018/0061 · service charges · Mid Sussex · decided 8 Apr 2018
The tribunal found it had no jurisdiction to decide whether the proposed loft fire-safety works were required and reasonable, and decided that the cost of those works, which it treated as an improvement rather than repair, cannot be recovered through the service charge; it also made a section 20C order.
| Outcome | Not payable |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Order made |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | Landlord or management company |
| Freeholder / landlord | Retirement Lease Housing Association |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | An estate, 5 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2017 |
| Items in dispute | major works |
| Items disallowed or reduced | major works |
| Total demanded | £20,000 |
| 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
- freeholder
Applicant : Retirement Lease Housing Association
- years
the budget for 2017/2018 which included
- outcome
The Tribunal determines that the Applicant is not entitled to recover
- items reduced
The Tribunal determines that the Applicant is not entitled to recover
- total demanded
included a sum of £20,000 for the provision of fire screens
- s20c
determines that it is just and equitable in the circumstances for an order to be made under Section 20C
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.