Flat 210, 130 Clapham Common Southside, London SW4 9DX
LON/00AY/LSC/2023/0377 · service charges · Lambeth · decided 26 Feb 2024
figures not yet checkedOn review, the tribunal found it had no jurisdiction to make a s.20C order covering leaseholders who had not authorised the applicant to act for them, so it made no s.20C order against the landlord.
| Outcome | Other decision |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Refused |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | Leaseholder(s) |
| Freeholder / landlord | Latitude Management Company Ltd |
| Management company | Latitude Management Company Ltd |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | One flat |
| Service charge years in dispute | not stated |
| Items in dispute | legal and professional 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 | 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
Respondent : Latitude Management Company Ltd
- outcome
we review our original order and make no s.20C order against the Respondent.
- s20c
we review our original order and make no s.20C order against the Respondent.
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.