10-25, Block 2 Meeching Place, Church Hill, Newhaven, East Sussex, BN9 9LP
CHI/21UF/LUS/2023/0001 · LUS · Lewes · decided 23 Sep 2024
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the RTM company £29,360.70 of accrued uncommitted service charges, plus £344.11 interest and £7,238.00 costs, totalling £36,942.81.
| Outcome | Other decision |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Not applied for |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | RTM company |
| Freeholder / landlord | Adelaide Homes (Sussex) Limited |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | Adelaide Property Management Limited |
| Building | A block, 15 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2021 |
| Items in dispute | other, reserve fund |
| Items disallowed or reduced | none stated |
| Total demanded | not stated as one figure |
| Total found payable | £36,942.81 |
| Fees or costs ordered | the respondent to pay the applicant £7,238.00 in costs including the £220 hearing fee |
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
The property in question is a block of 15 flats
- freeholder
Respondent Freeholder : Adelaide Homes (Sussex) Limited
- agent
in the name of Adelaide Property Management Limited
- years
for the period 25th December 2021 to 22nd December 2022
- outcome
The Tribunal determines that the amount of accrued uncommitted service
- total payable
The total of £36,942.81. is payable within 28 days.
- costs
Costs are therefore awarded to the Applicant in pursuance of Rule 13(1)(b) at
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.