Flats 4-25 Liberty House, Guildford Street, Chertsey, KT16 9GU Flats 1-7 Regency House, Guildford Street, Chertsey, KT16 9GW Flats 1-40 Charles House, Guildford Street, Chertsey, KT16 9GT Flats 1-25
CHI/19UC/LDC/2024/0082 · dispensation from consultation · Runnymede · decided 10 Feb 2025
The tribunal granted the management company retrospective dispensation from the section 20 consultation requirements for its October 2023 agreement with Octopus Rentals Limited to end an equipment rental contract and buy the equipment.
| 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 | Fox Lane Management Company Limited |
| Management company | Fox Lane Management Company Limited |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | An estate |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2026 |
| Items in dispute | other |
| Items disallowed or reduced | none stated |
| Total demanded | £76,057.42 |
| 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
- freeholder
Applicant : Fox Lane Management Company Limited
- outcome
The Applicant is granted dispensation under Section 20ZA of
- total demanded
The consideration agreed with Octopus to terminate the Agreement and to buy the equipment was £76,057.42
- s20
The Tribunal grants dispensation accordingly.
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.