Flat 5 St.Anne's Court, Nizells Avenue, Hove BN3 1PR
CHI/00ML/LIS/2018/0061 · LIS · Brighton and Hove · decided 28 Feb 2019
The Tribunal determined that the £2,902.89 of service charges is payable because the Respondents did not dispute the amounts, so the claimed water-damage set-off was not considered, and a separate question on the Applicant's costs is left for further directions.
| Outcome | Payable as demanded |
|---|---|
| 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 | Greyclyde Investments Limited |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | Leasehold Management |
| Building | One flat |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2017, 2018 |
| Items in dispute | insurance, major works, legal and professional fees, administration charges |
| Items disallowed or reduced | none stated |
| Total demanded | £2,902.89 |
| Total found payable | £2,902.89 |
| 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. Compare with the original.
What the decision says
- agent
Mr [name] of Leasehold Management, the managing agents
- years
service charges demanded between July 2017 and September 2018, totalling £2902.89
- outcome
The Tribunal determines that the sum of £2,902.89 is payable as
- total demanded
service charges demanded between July 2017 and September 2018, totalling £2902.89
- total payable
The Tribunal determines that the sum of £2,902.89 is payable as
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.