Flat 3, Roydon Mansions, 32 Junction Road N19 5RE
LON/00AU/LSC/2020/0018 · service charges · Islington · decided 21 Apr 2021
figures not yet checkedThe tribunal dismissed the leaseholder's challenge to the 2017 service charges because he did not set out the factual or legal basis of his dispute, and it declined to make a section 20C order.
| 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 | not a company, or not stated |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | One flat |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2017 |
| Items in dispute | not stated |
| Items disallowed or reduced | none stated |
| Total demanded | £10,954.38 |
| 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
It identifies the service charge year in dispute as “2017”
- outcome
the Application is dismissed
- total demanded
the value of the charges in dispute as £10,954.38
- s20c
The Tribunal also declines to make a ‘s.20C’ order limiting the recoverability of the Landlord’s 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.