Service Charge Check
part of Rent Rise Check: rent increases, repayment orders and licensing for renters

← Decisions near BH1 1RS

Montague Court, 66 Lansdowne Road, Bournemouth BH1 1RS

CHI/00HN/LDC/2022/0002 · dispensation from consultation · Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole · decided 23 Feb 2022

The tribunal granted the applicant company dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements for urgent roof repairs at Montague Court, while making no finding on whether the costs are reasonable or payable.

OutcomeOther decision
Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case)Not applied for
Section 20 consultationDispensation granted
Who appliedLandlord or management company
Freeholder / landlordnot a company, or not stated
Management companyMontague Court Lansdowne Management Company Limited
Managing agentnone named
BuildingA block
Service charge years in disputenot stated
Items in disputerepairs and maintenance
Items disallowed or reducednone stated
Total demandednot stated as one figure
Total found payablenot stated as one figure
Fees or costs orderednone 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

management company
Applicant : Montague Court Lansdowne Management Company Limited.
outcome
The Tribunal grants dispensation from the consultation requirements of S.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 in respect of the roof repairs
s20
The Tribunal grants dispensation from the consultation requirements of S.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 in respect of the roof repairs

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.