Anglesey House, Lindfield Street, London, E14 6HS
LON/00BG/LDC/2025/0644 · dispensation from consultation · Tower Hamlets · decided 27 Mar 2025
The tribunal granted the landlord retrospective dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements for additional scaffolding costing £79,054.37 plus VAT, but made no decision on whether those costs are reasonable or payable.
| 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 | Community Limited |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block, 60 flats |
| 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
Anglesey House (“the Building”) is a high-rise 10 storey building with 60 residential flats.
- outcome
The Tribunal grants the application for retrospective dispensation from statutory consultation in respect of additional scaffolding in the sum of £79,054.37 plus VAT.
- s20
The Tribunal is therefore satisfied that it is reasonable to grant unconditional retrospective dispensation from the consultation requirements of s.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 in regard to the works set out herein.
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.