398-01 Milltown Apartments, Stand Lane, Radcliffe, Manchester, M26 1LJ
MAN/00BN/LDC/2024/0007 · dispensation from consultation · Bury · decided 1 Jul 2024
The tribunal granted retrospective dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements for emergency repairs to the water supply pipes in the cellar, which cost £8397.16, but leaseholders can still challenge the service charge costs under section 27A.
| 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 | Grey GR Limited Partnership Management Company Ltd |
| Management company | Partnership Management Company Ltd |
| Managing agent | Inspired Property Management Limited |
| Building | A block, 12 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | not stated |
| Items in dispute | repairs and maintenance |
| Items disallowed or reduced | none stated |
| Total demanded | £8,397.16 |
| 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
comprising of 12 residential units let on long leases
- freeholder
Applicant : Grey GR Limited Partnership
- agent
The Managing Agents Inspired Property Management Limited sent emails to
- outcome
dispensation from consultation for the works as
- total demanded
the cost of the works was £8397.16
- s20
The Tribunal determines that dispensation from consultation for the works as
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.