Flats 69, 70, & 78 Raynham, Norfolk Crescent, London, W2 2PQ
LON/00BK/LSC/2021/0198 · service charges · Westminster · decided 16 May 2022
figures not yet checkedThe tribunal found the disputed service charge and administration charge demands for flats 69 and 70 were validly served and reasonably incurred, except for a conceded telephone charge, and refused orders under section 20C and paragraph 5A.
| Outcome | Payable as demanded |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Refused |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | Landlord or management company |
| Freeholder / landlord | Raynham Freehold Company Limited |
| Management company | Raynham Freehold Management Company Limited |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block, 70 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2019 |
| Items in dispute | administration charges, cleaning and grounds, insurance, legal and professional fees, major works, management fees, other, repairs and maintenance, reserve fund, utilities |
| Items disallowed or reduced | utilities |
| 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
a large block consisting of about 70 flats
- freeholder
Raynham Freehold Company Applicants : Limited
- management company
the second, Raynham Freehold Management Company Limited, was in fact dormant.
- years
the interim service charge and year end balancing payment for the 2019/20 service charge year
- outcome
the Applicant has been wholly successful
- items reduced
Mr [name] conceded a charge of £69 for telephone charges, for all three flats.
- s20c
We refuse the applications to make orders 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.