Melton Court, Onslow Crescent, London, SW7 3JH
LON/00AW/LDC/2019/0130 · dispensation from consultation · Kensington and Chelsea · decided 16 Sep 2019
The tribunal granted the landlord dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements for urgent masonry repair works at Melton Court, while noting that leaseholders' rights to challenge the cost and payability of the works are preserved.
| 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 | Welcome Trust Limited |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | Savills (UK) Limited |
| Building | A block |
| 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
- freeholder
Applicant : Welcome Trust Limited
- agent
Representative : [name] (UK) Limited
- outcome
The tribunal determines that it will exercise its discretion and grant dispensation from the requirements to consult leaseholders in relation to the urgent works
- s20
grant dispensation from the requirements to consult leaseholders in relation to the urgent works required following reports of masonry falling from the building
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.