3rd Floor Flat, 79 Sutherland Avenue, London W9 2HG

LON/00BK/LSC/2022/0391 · service charges · Westminster · decided 11 Aug 2023

figures not yet checked

The tribunal found the major works carried out by Woodnut Construction & Development Limited and the related service charges for 2020 to 2022 reasonable, validly demanded and payable, with all sums paid credited, and declined to make a section 20C order or refund the application fee.

Outcome	Payable as demanded
Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case)	Refused
Section 20 consultation	Not in issue
Who applied	Leaseholder(s)
Freeholder / landlord	not a company, or not stated
Management company	none named
Managing agent	Bawtry’s Estate Management
Building	One flat
Service charge years in dispute	2020, 2021, 2022
Items in dispute	major works, other
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	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; the two readings disagreed on something, so these figures haven't been checked yet and are left out of the statistics. Compare with the original.

What the decision says

agent: since 2021 has been managed by Bawtry’s Estate Management
years: the service charge years 2020, 2021 and 2022
outcome: The tribunal finds the costs of the major works have been validly demanded and are payable by the applicant.
total demanded: amounting to £26,8468.95 representing the applicant’s liability
total payable: concluded the sum of £26,8468.95 is payable by the applicant
s20c: does not consider it just and equitable to make an

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.