5 & 6 North End, Wisbech, Cambridgeshire, PE13 1PE
CAM/12UD/LCR/2025/0003 · LCR · Fenland · decided 8 May 2026
figures not yet checkedThe tribunal could not determine any uncommitted service charges under section 94 because the respondent failed to comply with disclosure directions, but it found the leaseholders owed no further service charges for 2017 to 2023 and made a section 20C order.
| Outcome | Other decision |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Order made |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | Leaseholder(s) |
| Freeholder / landlord | Assethold Limited |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | Eagerstates Limited |
| Building | A block |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2017, 2023, 2024 |
| Items in dispute | insurance, major works, repairs and maintenance |
| 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
- freeholder
(2) Harbour and Yacht’s View RTM Company Limited
- agent
Represented by : Ronni Gurvits, Eagerstates Limited
- years
(4) The Applicant leaseholders: a. were only liable to pay to the Respondent the service charges in the second column for the periods ending on 25 December in the year identified in the tables below;
- outcome
(1) The tribunal cannot determine any amount of uncommitted service charges payable by the Respondent to Harbour and Yacht’s View RTM Company Limited under section 94 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002
- s20c
given the unfortunate history we consider it just and equitable to make an order under section 20C of the 1985 Act to ensure there is no dispute about this in future.
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.