Flat 2, 51 Tisbury Road, Hove, BN3 3BL
CHI/00ML/LAC/2020/0010 · administration charges · Brighton and Hove · decided 26 Feb 2021
The tribunal found the leaseholder liable to pay £3489.40 of administration charges for legal costs of forfeiture-related steps, reducing the amount claimed, and ordered repayment of the £100 application fee.
| Outcome | Reduced |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Not applied for |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | Landlord or management company |
| Freeholder / landlord | Tisbury Road Hove Limited |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | One flat, 142 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | not stated |
| Items in dispute | legal and professional fees |
| Items disallowed or reduced | legal and professional fees |
| Total demanded | £4,908.60 |
| Total found payable | £3,489.40 |
| Fees or costs ordered | the respondent to reimburse application fee £100 |
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
- outcome
the Respondent is liable to pay administration charges to the Applicant in the sum of £3489.40
- items reduced
the reasonable level of administration charges for the legal costs incurred to be:
- total demanded
legal costs were incurred in the sum of £4908.60
- total payable
the Respondent’s liability to pay administration charges is £3489.40
- costs
The Respondent shall further pay the fee of £100 paid by the Applicant in respect of this application.
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.