Powell Court Waldrons Path Croydon CR2 6LT
LON/00AH/LDC/2025/0973 · dispensation from consultation · Croydon · decided 16 Mar 2026
The Tribunal granted retrospective dispensation without conditions from the statutory consultation requirements for urgent works to remove asbestos from a communal area after fire damage, finding the leaseholder had not shown real prejudice.
| Outcome | Other decision |
|---|---|
| Section 20C (landlord's costs of the case) | Not applied for |
| Section 20 consultation | Dispensation granted |
| Who applied | RTM company |
| Freeholder / landlord | Powell Court RTM Ltd |
| Management company | none named |
| Managing agent | Prior Estates Ltd |
| Building | A block, 12 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
a block of 12 units split over three floors
- freeholder
Applicant : Powell Court RTM Ltd
- agent
Representative : Prior Estates Ltd ([name])
- outcome
The Tribunal grants this application to dispense retrospectively with the consultation requirements imposed by section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 without condition
- s20
The Tribunal grants this application to dispense retrospectively with the consultation requirements imposed by section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 without condition
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.