Flat 2, 11 St John’s Avenue, London NW3 5JY
LON/00AG/LSC/2021/0281 · service charges · Camden · decided 8 Feb 2022
figures not yet checkedThe tribunal dismissed the leaseholder's service charge application because the applicant could not prove he was a tenant under a lease of the property and gave no evidence supporting the charges, and no s.20C order was made.
| Outcome | Dismissed or struck out |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Refused |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | Leaseholder(s) |
| Freeholder / landlord | Fitzjohns Avenue Project Ltd |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | One flat |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2019, 2020 |
| Items in dispute | insurance, major works, repairs and maintenance, administration charges |
| 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 | 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
- freeholder
Respondents : Fitzjohns Avenue Project Ltd
- years
seeking a determination of the reasonableness of service charges for the years 2019-2021
- outcome
The Applicant’s application is dismissed.
- s20c
No order is made under s20C Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 or Schedule 11 Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002.
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.