Palace Court, Palace Street, Bolton, BL1 2DR
MAN/00BL/LDC/2025/0671 · dispensation from consultation · Bolton · decided 13 Mar 2026
The tribunal granted the landlord dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements for replacing the lift at Palace Court, costing £95,600 excluding VAT, because the objecting leaseholder did not identify any prejudice from the failure to consult.
| 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 | Mosscare St. Vincent’s Housing Group Limited |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block, 12 flats |
| Service charge years in dispute | not stated |
| Items in dispute | major works |
| Items disallowed or reduced | none stated |
| Total demanded | £95,600 |
| 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 12, 2-bedroom residential flats and various common areas.
- freeholder
This is an application made by Mosscare St. Vincent’s Housing Group Limited (“the Applicant”)
- outcome
dispensation is granted, limited to the works set out above
- total demanded
The Works carried out comprise replacement of the lift and lift machinery at a cost of £95,600 excluding VAT.
- s20
dispensation is granted, limited to the works set out above
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.