Cask Store, East Tucker Street, Bristol BS1 6WF
CHI/00HB/LSC/2020/0108 · service charges · Bristol, City of · decided 26 Jul 2021
figures not yet checkedThe Tribunal found most of the disputed Cask Store service charges for 2017 to 2020 payable, but disallowed the 2017 car park charge under section 20B, a duplicated website charge and an electricity overcharge, and made no section 20C order.
| Outcome | Reduced |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Refused |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | Leaseholder(s) |
| Freeholder / landlord | FREML (Residential) Ltd |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | Savills (UK) Ltd |
| Building | A block, 38 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 |
| Items in dispute | cleaning and grounds, legal and professional fees, other, repairs and maintenance, reserve fund, utilities |
| Items disallowed or reduced | other, repairs and maintenance, reserve fund, utilities |
| Total demanded | £13,528.33 |
| 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
- flats n
containing 38 apartments
- freeholder
Respondent : FREML (Residential) Ltd.
- agent
Savills (UK) Ltd to manage the Cask Store and the rest of the Estate
- years
the Service Charges for 2017 and 2020 could be included in the Tribunal's determination
- outcome
The Tribunal accordingly determines that the 2017 Car Park Service Charge for 2017 is not payable by virtue of section 20B of the 1985 Act.
- items reduced
The Respondents accept that two of the invoices totaling £381.83 were wrongly charged.
- total demanded
the total amount in dispute by the Applicants across the three Service Charges for the three (sic) years in question is £13,528.33 including VAT
- s20c
It follows that a section 20C order is not necessary even if it were just and equitable for the Tribunal to make such an order.
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.