Tarleton Lodge, Breakspear Road North, Harefield, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB9 6NA
LON/00AS/LSC/2019/0270 · service charges · Hillingdon · decided 17 Nov 2020
The county court ordered the defendant company to repay £2,152.79 of estate service charges the claimant had paid over six years, refused statutory interest, and dismissed her claims for damages.
| Outcome | Other decision |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Not applied for |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | Other |
| Freeholder / landlord | not a company, or not stated |
| Management company | Heritage (Breakspear) Ltd |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | An estate |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 |
| Items in dispute | cleaning and grounds, utilities |
| Items disallowed or reduced | none stated |
| Total demanded | £2,152.79 |
| Total found payable | £2,152.79 |
| Fees or costs ordered | the respondent to pay the applicant hearing fees of £610.00 and costs of £574.50 |
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
- management company
Heritage (Breakspear) Ltd 1st Defendant
- years
The relevant years were from 2013/2014 until 2018/2019.
- outcome
The Court orders the Defendant to repay the Claimant the sum of £2,152.79 within 14 days.
- total demanded
This now totals £2,152.79.
- total payable
The Court orders the Defendant to repay the Claimant the sum of £2,152.79 within 14 days.
- costs
orders the Defendant to pay the Claimant costs of £574.50
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.