Clarence House, Tunbridge Wells, Kent, TN1 1HE
CHI/29UQ/LDC/2024/0025 · dispensation from consultation · Tunbridge Wells · decided 18 Mar 2024
The tribunal granted the landlord retrospective dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements for urgent roofing and plumbing repairs at the building, on condition that a copy of the decision is given 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 | Regal Point Clarence House Management Co Ltd |
| Management company | Regal Point Clarence House Management Co Ltd |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block, 8 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
comprising eight flats across three floors
- freeholder
Applicant : Regal Point Clarence House Management Co Ltd
- outcome
The Tribunal grants an order retrospectively dispensing with the consultation requirements under S.20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
- s20
The Tribunal grants an order retrospectively dispensing with the consultation requirements under S.20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
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.