Osbourne House, 63a Carlisle Road, Eastbourne, East Sussex BN20 7BS
CHI/21UC/LDC/2022/0008 · dispensation from consultation · Eastbourne · decided 24 Mar 2022
The tribunal granted the management company dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements for urgent works to replace the lift door motor, encoder and VVVF drive, without deciding whether the costs are reasonable or payable.
| 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 | Osbourne House (Eastbourne) Management Company Limited |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block, 4 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | not stated |
| Items in dispute | major works |
| 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
[name] House is a purpose-built block of four flats
- management company
Applicant : [name] House ([name]) Management Company Limited
- outcome
The Tribunal grants dispensation from the consultation requirements of S.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
- s20
The Tribunal grants dispensation from the consultation requirements of S.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 in respect of the works to replace the lift door motor
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.