18 Cadogan Square & 39 Pont Street,London,SW1X 0JS
LON/00AW/LDC/2025/0697 · dispensation from consultation · Kensington and Chelsea · decided 9 Feb 2026
The tribunal granted the landlord dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements for structural repairs to gutters and timbers carried out by a leaseholder, finding that leaseholders had shown no relevant prejudice; it made no decision on whether the costs are payable or reasonable.
| Outcome | Other decision |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Not applied for |
| Section 20 consultation | Consultation failure found |
| Who applied | Landlord or management company |
| Freeholder / landlord | 31-39 Pont Street Freehold Limited |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block |
| Service charge years in dispute | not stated |
| Items in dispute | repairs and maintenance |
| Items disallowed or reduced | none stated |
| Total demanded | £14,807.48 |
| 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
Applicant : 31-39 Pont Street Freehold Limited
- outcome
The Tribunal grants the application for the dispensation of all or any of the consultation requirements
- total demanded
The agreed cost of the Applicant’s element is said to be £14,807.48.
- s20
It is evident that a statutorily compliant consultation has not been carried out by the Applicant.
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.