55 Penge Road, London, SE25 4EJ
LON/00AH/LCP/2021/0010 · LCP · Croydon · decided 28 Feb 2022
The tribunal assessed the RTM company's liability for the landlord's costs of the right to manage claim, allowing reduced solicitor and managing agent fees, and ordered the RTM company to refund the hearing fee of £200 but not the application fee.
| Outcome | Other decision |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Not applied for |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | Landlord or management company |
| Freeholder / landlord | Assethold Ltd |
| Management company | 55 Penge Road RTM Company Limited |
| Managing agent | Harmens Management |
| Building | One flat · 5 decisions about this building |
| Service charge years in dispute | not stated |
| Items in dispute | management fees, legal and professional fees |
| 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 pay costs of £1828.75 plus VAT ([name] legal fees), £450 plus VAT (Eagerstates fees) and disbursements |
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 : [name] Ltd
- management company
Respondent : 55 Penge Road RTM Company Limited
- agent
Ms [name], Harmens Management
- outcome
The Tribunal determines that the amount of costs payable by the respondent is
- costs
The Tribunal orders the respondent to refund the applicant its hearing fee of £200 but not its application fee of £100.
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.