Skyline Central 1, 50 Goulden Street, Manchester, M4 5EJ
MAN/00BN/LSC/2021/0026 · service charges · Manchester · decided 25 Mar 2022
The tribunal found the £387,066 additional cladding costs and the 2020 Gateley Vinden fees were payable, with no consultation requirement applying to the fees, and refused the applicants' section 20C application.
| Outcome | Payable as demanded |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Refused |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | Leaseholder(s) |
| Freeholder / landlord | Adriatic Land 3 Limited |
| Management company | Home Ground Management Limited |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2021 |
| Items in dispute | legal and professional fees, major works, repairs and maintenance |
| Items disallowed or reduced | none stated |
| 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 : [name] 3 Limited
- management company
the Respondent, Home Ground Management Limited, (“HGM”)
- years
the 2021 service charge year
- outcome
the additional costs totalling £387,066 (including VAT) in respect of the cladding construction project are relevant costs to be taken into account
- s20c
it would not be just and equitable in the circumstances to grant the Applicants’ s20C application, which is denied accordingly
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.