23 Eridge Road, Tunbridge Wells, Kent TN4 8HJ
HAV/29UQ/LDC/2026/0035 · dispensation from consultation · Tunbridge Wells · decided 23 Jun 2026
The tribunal granted the landlord dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements for urgent damp and guttering repairs costing £1,200 at the building, finding no prejudice to leaseholders.
| 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 | Southern Land Securities Limited |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | Together Property Management Ltd |
| Building | A block, 4 flats · 2 decisions about this building |
| 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
- flats n
converted into four self-contained flats in the late 1980s
- freeholder
Applicant : Southern Land Securities Limited
- agent
Representative : Together Property Management Ltd
- outcome
1. The Tribunal grants the application for dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements in respect of the qualifying works.
- s20
The Tribunal grants the application for dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements in respect of the qualifying works.
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.