AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·30 September 2020

Tenant's Application Settled for Credit and Waiver of Charges

Case No.

📌 In brief

In a recent case, a tenant applied for a credit and waiver of additional charges. After hearing both sides, the First-tier Tribunal agreed to a settlement where the tenant received a credit of £681.21 and had their additional charges waived.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a credit and waiver of additional charges under certain conditions.

Topics

settlement agreementcredit to tenant's account

Provisions

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.27A(1)Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 s.11(5)(a)

📖 Technical summary

The tribunal dismissed the application after the parties agreed to a settlement.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) heard an application by a tenant for a credit and waiver of additional charges. The parties agreed to a settlement, granting the tenant a credit of £681.21 and waiving further interest, fees, and charges.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

Case Reference : CAM/11UC/LIS/2019/0009

Property : 105 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Applicants : [redacted]

Respondent: [redacted]

(Kensington) Limited

Represented by [NAME] : 15th April 2019

Type of Application : Section 27A(1) and (3) Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and Schedule 11(5)(a) Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002

Tribunal

: Judge J. Oxlade

M. Krisko BSc (EST MAN) FRICS

Date and venue of : 26th [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

________

DECISION ______

[COUNSEL] for the Applicants AND UPON HEARING Counsel [COUNSEL] [NAME] for the Respondent,

S E C FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2 AND UPON THE PARTIES agreeing terms in full and final settlement of the Applications, by which the Respondent agrees to apply a credit to the Applicants account in the sum of £681.21 and agrees to waive any interest, fees, and charges accrued additionally since the issue of the demand dated 4th January 2019 (attached as Appendix A) the Tribunal makes the no Order on the applications.

…………………..

Judge J. Oxlade

26th July 2019

APPENDIX A

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

Allowed12 cases

A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

The parties agreed to terms for a full and final settlement of the applications.
The respondent agreed to apply a credit of £681.21 to the applicants' account.
The respondent agreed to waive any additional interest, fees, and charges.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

It decided to grant a credit of £681.21 and waive additional charges for the tenant.

Who was involved?

A tenant and a landlord were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to settle the matter amicably, granting the tenant's request for a credit and waiver of charges.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the tenant's right to a credit and waiver of additional charges under the applicable laws.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the person who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation may also seek a credit and waiver of additional charges through a settlement agreement.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The demand letter and the settlement agreement were likely important documents.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Decisions like this can typically be appealed to a higher court.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is always recommended to get advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.

Official source: First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) — headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.