185 Kingsway, Hove, East Sussex BN3 4GL
CHI/00ML/LDC/2021/0115 · dispensation from consultation · Brighton and Hove · decided 14 Feb 2022
The tribunal granted the landlord dispensation from the section 20 consultation requirements for additional roof repair works to the rear roof, subject to conditions requiring copies of quotations to be provided to the leaseholders and allowing them to comment on or nominate contractors.
| Outcome | Other decision |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Not applied for |
| Section 20 consultation | Dispensation granted |
| Who applied | Landlord or management company |
| Freeholder / landlord | not a company, or not stated |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | Austin Rees Ltd |
| Building | A block |
| Service charge years in dispute | not stated |
| Items in dispute | repairs and maintenance |
| 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
- agent
Representative : Austin Rees Ltd
- outcome
The Tribunal grants dispensation from the consultation requirements of S.20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 in respect of additional works to the rear roof subject to the following conditions;
- s20
The Tribunal grants dispensation from the consultation requirements of S.20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 in respect of additional works to the rear roof subject to the following conditions;
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.