Ditton Place School, Brantridge Lane, Balcombe, West Sussex RH17 6JR
CHI/45UG/LVM/2019/0011 · variation of a management order · Mid Sussex · decided 23 Mar 2020
The tribunal refused to extend the management order over the amenity land at Ditton Place and gave winding-up directions covering the manager's liabilities, arrears recovery and the apportionment of management costs.
| Outcome | Other decision |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Not clear |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | Leaseholder(s) |
| Freeholder / landlord | not a company, or not stated |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | An estate, 4 flats · 2 decisions about this building |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2016, 2019 |
| Items in dispute | legal and professional fees, management 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 manager's legal and tribunal fees to be recovered from the lessees through the service charge |
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
- flats n
All twelve leasehold flats are within the newly enfranchised land.
- freeholder
the freeholder, Ditton Place Management Company Limited
- outcome
the tribunal decides that the application to extend the order should be refused
- costs
we direct that these costs are to be recovered from the lessees through the service charge
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.