Gabrielle Court, 1 Lancaster Grove, London NW3 4EU
LON/00AG/LSC/2023/0042 · service charges · Camden · decided 2 Aug 2023
The tribunal granted the landlord dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements for urgent repairs to the block's heating and hot water system, which cost £9,330 including VAT.
| 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 | Gabrielle Court Limited |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block, 16 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | 2023 |
| Items in dispute | repairs and maintenance |
| Items disallowed or reduced | none stated |
| Total demanded | £9,330 |
| 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 purpose built block of 16 flats failed in early 2023
- years
The applicant states that both of the communal boilers providing hot water and heating for the purpose built block of 16 flats failed in early 2023.
- outcome
The tribunal grants dispensation pursuant to s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
- total demanded
at a cost of £9,330 including VAT
- s20
The tribunal grants dispensation pursuant to s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (‘the 1985 Act’) in respect of urgent works of repair to the heating and hot water system
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.