Tudor Court, 63 Earls Avenue, Folkestone, Kent, CT20 2HA
HAV/29UL/LCO/2025/0003 · LCO · Folkestone and Hythe · decided 21 Aug 2026
The Tribunal dismissed the RTM company's application for an order requiring the respondent to comply with Chapter 1 of Part 2 of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, because the claim notice did not specify an acquisition date, so no valid right to manage was acquired and no breach was enforceable.
| Outcome | Dismissed or struck out |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Not applied for |
| Section 20 consultation | Not in issue |
| Who applied | RTM company |
| Freeholder / landlord | not a company, or not stated |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | Blockwise Block and Estate Management Limited |
| Building | A block, 7 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | not stated |
| Items in dispute | not stated |
| 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
- flats n
The Property is a block of 7 flats.
- agent
There is an undated letter from a management company called Blockwise Block and Estate Management Limited (registered number 16116435).
- outcome
The application for an order under s.107 is dismissed.
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.