Flats A and B, 5 Royal Parade, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3QD
LON/00BD/LSC/2019/0187 · service charges · Richmond upon Thames · decided 5 Nov 2019
The Tribunal found the insurance premiums charged for 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 were not reasonable, set a reasonable charge of £600 per year for the building's leaseholders, and made a s.20C order so the landlord's costs cannot be added to the service charge.
| Outcome | Reduced |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Order made |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | Leaseholder(s) |
| Freeholder / landlord | JF Stone Investments Limited |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2017, 2018 |
| Items in dispute | insurance |
| Items disallowed or reduced | insurance |
| 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. Compare with the original.
What the decision says
- freeholder
Respondent : JF [name] Investments Limited
- years
the cost of insurance charged to the Applicant for the years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 was not reasonable
- outcome
the cost of insurance charged to the Applicant for the years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 was not reasonable
- items reduced
the cost of insurance charged to the Applicant for the years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 was not reasonable
- s20c
The Tribunal allows the Appellant's application under Landlord and Tenant Act 1985,s.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.