30-33 Station Approach, West Byfleet, KT14 6NF
HAV/43UM/UNK/2025/0617 · UNK · Woking · decided 27 Apr 2026
The Tribunal found it has no jurisdiction to determine the right to manage acquisition under section 84 because no valid counter-notice was given, so there is no dispute about entitlement, and it ordered the respondent to reimburse the applicant's £114 application fee.
| 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 | Assethold Limited |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block |
| Service charge years in dispute | not stated |
| Items in dispute | not stated |
| Items disallowed or reduced | none stated |
| Total demanded | not stated as one figure |
| Total found payable | not stated as one figure |
| Fees or costs ordered | the respondent to reimburse the applicant the fees paid in respect of the application, £114 |
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
Respondent : Assethold Limited
- outcome
The Tribunal determines that it has no jurisdiction to make a determination under section 84(3) Commonhold and [name] Reform Act 2002
- costs
the Respondent shall reimburse to the Applicant the fees it has paid in respect of the Application, in the sum of £ 114.
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.