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

← Decisions near CR7 8NY

Flat 1, 12 Luna Road, Thornton Heath, Surrey, CR7 8NY

LON/00AH/LSC/2020/0196 · service charges · Croydon · decided 3 Mar 2021

The tribunal ordered the applicant to pay the landlord £2,313 including VAT as costs, because she acted unreasonably in bringing and conducting her service charge challenge, which was treated as an abuse of the process.

OutcomeOther decision
Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case)Not applied for
Section 20 consultationNot in issue
Who appliedLeaseholder(s)
Freeholder / landlordCroydon (Unique) Limited
Management companynone named
Managing agentnone named
BuildingOne flat
Service charge years in dispute2017, 2018, 2019
Items in disputeadministration charges, legal and professional fees
Items disallowed or reducednone stated
Total demandednot stated as one figure
Total found payablenot stated as one figure
Fees or costs orderedthe applicant to pay the respondent £2,313 including VAT for costs of the application

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
Respondent : [name] (Unique) Limited
years
£1,273.34 which became due on 1 April 2017; £1,512,67 which became due on 1 April 2018 and £1,562.67 which became due on 1 April 2019
outcome
The Tribunal makes an Order under Rule 13(1)(b) of the Tribunal Procedure
costs
the Applicant pays the sum of £2,313 including VAT to the Respondent in respect of costs

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.