Hitcham Court, 1 Station Approach, London N12 7EG
LON/00AC/LDC/2023/0252 · dispensation from consultation · Barnet · decided 13 Jun 2023
The tribunal granted retrospective dispensation from the section 20 consultation requirements for the removal of flammable cladding at Hitcham Court, because the works were needed urgently to keep insurance cover.
| Outcome | Other decision |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Not applied for |
| Section 20 consultation | Dispensation granted |
| Who applied | RTM company |
| Freeholder / landlord | not a company, or not stated |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | ABC Block Management Limited |
| Building | A block |
| Service charge years in dispute | not stated |
| Items in dispute | other |
| 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
- freeholder
the freeholder of both buildings is a company called SCWH Limited
- agent
HM Residents’ Company has appointed ABC Block Management Limited as its agent
- outcome
The tribunal is satisfied on the above analysis that it is reasonable in all the circumstances of this case to dispense with the formal requirements of consultation under section 20 of the 1985 Act.
- s20
the consultation requirements of section 20 of the 1985 Act are dispensed with, in respect of the cladding removal works referred to in this application
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.