Vogans Mill, 17 Mill Street, London SE1 2BZ
LON/00BE/LDC/2019/0058 · dispensation from consultation · Southwark · decided 21 May 2019
The tribunal granted the landlord dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements for urgent repairs to the broken building security gate at Vogans Mill.
| 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 | Rosehaugh Co-Partnership Developments Ltd. |
| Management company | Vogans Mill Management Company Ltd. |
| Managing agent | none named |
| Building | A block, 70 flats · 3 decisions about this building |
| 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
The property which is the subject of this application consists of a block comprising 70 flats and 3 offices.
- freeholder
The directions identified the Applicant as Rosehaugh Co-Partnership Developments Ltd. (“Rosehaugh”).
- management company
Applicant : Vogans Mill Management Company Ltd.
- outcome
Tribunal Judge [name]
- s20
The Tribunal determines that the statutory consultation requirements shall be dispensed with in respect of repairs to the broken building security gate at the property.
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.