Dalmeny House, 9 Thurloe Place, London, SW7 2RY
LON/00AW/LDC/2025/0669 · dispensation from consultation · Kensington and Chelsea · decided 23 Jun 2025
The tribunal granted retrospective dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements for the urgent asbestos removal works at Dalmeny House, finding no prejudice to the leaseholders, while making no finding on the reasonableness of the costs.
| 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 | not a company, or not stated |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block, 8 flats · 2 decisions about this building |
| 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 residential apartments across
- freeholder
Alfred Place Limited and
- outcome
the Tribunal is satisfied that it is reasonable to grant retrospective dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements
- s20
The Tribunal is satisfied that it is reasonable to grant retrospective dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements in relation to the asbestos removal works.
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.