Cambray Court, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire GL50 1JU
HAV/23UB/LDC/2025/0600 · dispensation from consultation · Cheltenham · decided 20 Jul 2025
The tribunal granted dispensation from the consultation requirements for the Cambray Court river wall works, on condition that the landlord pays £150 attendance costs to each objector who attended the hearing and cannot recover its application costs from objectors through the service charge.
| Outcome | Other decision |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Not applied for |
| Section 20 consultation | Consultation failure found |
| Who applied | Landlord or management company |
| Freeholder / landlord | not a company, or not stated |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block, 56 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | not stated |
| Items in dispute | major works |
| Items disallowed or reduced | none stated |
| Total demanded | £1,510,004 |
| Total found payable | not stated as one figure |
| Fees or costs ordered | the applicant to pay attendance costs of £150 to each objector who attended the hearing |
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
leaseholders of 56 flats
- outcome
is GRANTED CONDITIONALLY
- total demanded
as demanded from leaseholders totals £1,510,004.00 (including VAT)
- s20
The Tribunal has now made a finding that that effect in the related cases.
- costs
those lessees who attended the hearing on 9 April 2025 shall each receive costs of attendance summarily assessed at £150 each
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.