Flats 1-6 Wedgewood Court, Green Lane, Shelfield, Walsall, West Midlands, WS4 1RN
BIR/00CU/LIS/2018/0013 · LIS · Walsall · decided 19 Mar 2019
figures not yet checkedThe tribunal accepted that the landlord could not recover solicitors' fees through the service charge, but found the driveway resurfacing, gutter repair, grounds maintenance and roof supervision costs reasonable, and declined to make a section 20C order.
| Outcome | Reduced |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Refused |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | Leaseholder(s) |
| Freeholder / landlord | Stanley N Evans (Properties) Limited |
| Management company | Wedgewood Court RTM Company Ltd |
| Managing agent | Metropolitan PM Limited |
| Building | A block, 6 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2016 |
| Items in dispute | administration charges, cleaning and grounds, legal and professional fees, management fees, repairs and maintenance, reserve fund |
| Items disallowed or reduced | legal and professional fees |
| 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
- flats n
There are six flats to which access is gained through a single staircase.
- freeholder
Respondent : [name] (Properties) Limited
- management company
Wedgewood Court RTM Company Ltd (‘the RTM’) took over the management of the subject property
- agent
Representatives : Metropolitan PM Limited (MetroPM); Mr [name],
- years
service charges in respect of the subject property for the service charge years 2016-2017
- outcome
the Tribunal finds that the cost incurred by the Respondent of £4,836.00 (including VAT) was reasonably incurred and reasonable in amount.
- items reduced
the Respondent withdrew its objection to this submission and accepted that the legal fees could not be collected through the service charge.
- s20c
In the light of all the circumstances and in line with the backdrop to the issues addressed and determined in this case, the Tribunal finds that it is not just and equitable to make an order under section 20C.
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.