Flat 43, Trinity Court, 254 Gray’s Inn Road, London, WC1X 8JX
LON/00AG/LSC/2022/0385 · service charges · Camden · decided 9 Jun 2023
The tribunal found service charges and reserve fund contributions of £4,471.91 for 2020/21 to 2021/22 reasonable and payable, and the court assessed interest of £1,156.80 and court costs of £555.
| Outcome | Payable as demanded |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Not applied for |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | RTM company |
| Freeholder / landlord | Metropolitan Properties Co (FGC) Limited |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | Parkgate Aspen Ltd |
| Building | One flat, 90 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2020, 2021 |
| Items in dispute | other, reserve fund |
| Items disallowed or reduced | none stated |
| Total demanded | £4,471.91 |
| Total found payable | £4,471.91 |
| Fees or costs ordered | court costs of £555.00 assessed against the respondent |
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
- flats n
There are 90 flats, all of which were originally studio flats.
- freeholder
The landlord is the Metropolitan Properties Co (FGC) Limited.
- agent
The Applicant appointed Parkgate Aspen Ltd
- years
Service charges of £4,471.91 payable for the years 2020/21 to
- outcome
are reasonable and payable.
- total demanded
claiming arrears of service charges and interim service charges of £4,471.91
- total payable
Service charges of £4,471.91 payable
- costs
The Court assesses the Court costs in the sum of £555.00.
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.