Milford Court, Gillingham, Dorset SP8 4SX
CHI/19UE/LDC/2021/0089 · dispensation from consultation · Dorset · decided 27 Oct 2021
The tribunal granted the landlord company dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements for replacing a previous external grain hoist strut at the second floor of Milford Court, a block of 16 flats, because the work was urgent and no lessee objected.
| 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 | not a company, or not stated |
| Management company | Milford Court Management Company Limited |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block, 16 flats |
| 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
- flats n
comprising 16 flats
- management company
Applicant : Milford Court Management Company Limited
- outcome
The Tribunal therefore grants dispensation from the consultation requirements of S.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
- s20
The Tribunal therefore grants dispensation from the consultation requirements of S.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 in respect of the replacement of a previous external grain hoist strut at second floor.
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.