39 College Crescent, London, NW3 5LB
LON/00AG/LDC/2020/0193 · dispensation from consultation · Camden · decided 10 Jan 2021
The tribunal granted the landlord dispensation from the section 20 consultation requirements for urgent water-ingress repairs to the coach house membrane, but this does not apply to the coach house lease, which is business premises outside the tribunal's jurisdiction.
| 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 | 39 College Crescent Ltd |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | Tant Building Management 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
- freeholder
Applicant : 39 College Crescent Ltd
- agent
Representative : Tant Building Management Ltd
- outcome
The application for dispensation from the consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 in respect of the quotation set out in Paragraph 2 below is GRANTED.
- s20
The application for dispensation from the consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 in respect of the quotation set out in Paragraph 2 below is GRANTED.
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.