Service Charge Check
part of Rent Rise Check: rent increases, repayment orders and licensing for renters

← Decisions near E17 9JY

Flats 1-5 Wilding Court, 64A Eden Road, London E17 9JY

LON/00BH/LDC/2019/0106 · dispensation from consultation · Waltham Forest · decided 12 Aug 2019

The tribunal granted the RTM company dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements for scaffolding and remedial works to investigate and repair water ingress damage affecting flat 5.

OutcomeOther decision
Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case)Not applied for
Section 20 consultationDispensation granted
Who appliedRTM company
Freeholder / landlordnot a company, or not stated
Management companynone named
Managing agentWarwick Estates
BuildingA block
Service charge years in disputenot stated
Items in disputemajor works
Items disallowed or reducednone stated
Total demandednot stated as one figure
Total found payablenot stated as one figure
Fees or costs orderednone 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 a development consisting of five residential leasehold flats.
agent
Representatives : Warwick Estates
outcome
The Tribunal grants the application for the dispensation of all or any of the consultation requirements provided for by section 20 of the Landlord and tenant Act 1985
s20
The Tribunal grants the application for the dispensation of all or any of the consultation requirements provided for by section 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.