220 Southchurch Road, Southend on Sea, Essex, SS1 2LS
CAM/00KF/LDC/2024/0603 · dispensation from consultation · Southend-on-Sea · decided 10 Mar 2025
The Tribunal granted the landlord retrospective dispensation from the section 20 consultation requirements for urgent roof and gutter repairs costing £9,517.74, finding the leaseholders had not been prejudiced.
| 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 | Long term Reversions (Torquay) Ltd |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | Warwick Estates |
| Building | A block, 4 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | not stated |
| Items in dispute | repairs and maintenance |
| Items disallowed or reduced | none stated |
| Total demanded | £9,517.74 |
| 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 total number of flats is 4.
- freeholder
Applicant : [name] term Reversions (Torquay) Ltd
- agent
Representative : Warwick Estates
- outcome
The Tribunal is satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with compliance with the consultation requirements of Schedule 4 Part 2
- total demanded
Total Cost of Works - £9,517.74
- s20
The Tribunal is satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with compliance with the consultation requirements of Schedule 4 Part 2 to the Service Charges (Consultation etc) (England) Regulations 2003
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.