The Princeton 22 Estate, Bold Street & Chichester Road South, Hulme Manchester M15 5QQ
MAN/00BN/LAM/2018/0001 · appointment of a manager · Manchester · decided 17 Jun 2019
figures not yet checkedNo plain-English summary for this decision yet. See the original.
| Outcome | Dismissed or struck out |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Not applied for |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | Leaseholder(s) |
| Freeholder / landlord | not a company, or not stated |
| Management company | FirstPort Property Services Limited |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | An estate, 22 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | not stated |
| Items in dispute | repairs and maintenance, cleaning and grounds, utilities, administration charges |
| Items disallowed or reduced | administration charges |
| 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
Princeton 22 is a development of 22 leasehold properties
- freeholder
the Landlord”, Proxima GR Properties Ltd (“Proxima”)
- management company
Respondent : [name] Property Services Limited
- outcome
Having regard to all of the above, the Tribunal conclude that it is not just and convenient to appoint a manager in response to the current application.
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.