Cedar Court, Sir Bernard Lovell Road, Malmesbury SN16 9GG
HAV/00HY/LDC/2026/0031 · dispensation from consultation · Wiltshire · decided 9 Sep 2026
The tribunal granted the landlord dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements for urgent remedial fire door works at Cedar Court, on condition that the landlord sends a copy of the decision to all 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 | Long Term Reversions (Harrogate) Limited |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block, 30 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
The Property is described as a purpose-built block consisting of 30 flats.
- freeholder
Long Term Reversions (Harrogate) Limited,
- outcome
The Applicants are granted dispensation under Section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 from the consultation requirements
- s20
The Applicants are granted dispensation under Section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 from the consultation requirements
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.