First and second floor Maisonette, 42 Fortuneswell, Portland,Dorset, DT5 1LZ
HAV/00HR/LIS/2025/0013 · LIS · Dorset · decided 16 Apr 2026
figures not yet checkedThe tribunal decided that the landlord's claim for roof works and insurance fails because lease and statutory requirements were not met, so nothing is payable, and orders restricting his costs were made.
| Outcome | Not payable |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Order made |
| Section 20 consultation | Consultation failure found |
| Who applied | Landlord or management company |
| Freeholder / landlord | not a company, or not stated |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | One flat |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2023 |
| Items in dispute | insurance, repairs and maintenance |
| Items disallowed or reduced | insurance, repairs and maintenance |
| Total demanded | £4,788.49 |
| 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
- years
accounts for the year ending 31st December 2023
- outcome
his claim fails
- items reduced
his claim fails
- total demanded
half was claimed from Ms [name] in the sum of £4,788.49
- s20c
orders are made restricting costs under both provisions
- s20
accepted that he had not complied with any consultation requirements under s.20 of the 1985 Act
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.