Service Charge Check
part of Rent Rise Check: rent increases, repayment orders and licensing for renters

← Decisions near N5 2NR

56a Grosvenor Avenue, London, N5 2NR

LON/00AU/LSC/2025/0747 · service charges · Islington · decided 10 Sep 2025

figures not yet checked

The tribunal decided the leaseholder is not liable to pay £3,809.27 for redecorating the communal corridors and landing, as she has no use of those areas, and the council must repay her £337 fees and cannot recover its costs of the case.

OutcomeNot stated
Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case)Order made
Section 20 consultationNot in issue
Who appliedLeaseholder(s)
Freeholder / landlordnot a company, or not stated
Management companynone named
Managing agentnone named
BuildingOne flat
Service charge years in dispute2023
Items in disputemajor works
Items disallowed or reducednone stated
Total demanded£3,809.27
Total found payablenot stated as one figure
Fees or costs orderedrespondent to reimburse the applicant fees of £337

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

years
charged in the 2023-4 major works final statement
total demanded
£3,809.27 charged in the 2023-4 major works final statement
s20c
the Tribunal makes an order under section 20C of the Act
costs
the Tribunal orders the Respondent to reimburse the Applicant the fees of £337 she has paid to have the application issued and heard

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.