000			01998cad a22002535a 4500
001			L143135
008			080409s2008 xxk f v 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u143135
041	0		_aeng
050	0	4	_a346.4104343 $2 18
245	0	0	_aAuger and another v LB Camden _h[electronic resource]
260			_aLondon _bLands Tribunal _c2008
520			_aLRX 81 2007, 14 March 2008. Considers how closely landlords should consult tenants when employing contractors in cases where it intends to bill leaseholders for works carried out. The appellant (A) appealed against a Leasehold Valuation Tribunal (LVT) decision that the respondent Council (C) be granted dispensation from setting up framework agreements to follow leaseholder consultation rules. C had argued that due to its intention to enter into a long-term deal with a contractor and in order to reduce costs, it was unable to provide meaningful estimates to tenants. LVT agreed, and A appealed to the Lands Tribunal. "Held": The withdrawal of consultation rights from A could foreseeably cause detriment to A. It would in effect give carte blanche to C to arrange for any contractors it saw fit and pass the charges on to A. C had not given substantial reason for doing this, save to say that at the time it was not able to provide useful estimates. It would be difficult, if not impossible, for A to argue against any costs incurred. Appeal allowed.
521	2		_aAdvanced
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aLANDLORD AND TENANT ACT 1985
650	2	4	_aTANFERN LTD V CAMERON-MACDONALD
650	2	4	_aPEPPER V HART
650	2	4	_aSERVICE CHARGES (CONSULTATION REQUIREMENTS) (ENGLAND) REGULATIONS 2003
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aPROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY-LEASEHOLD RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY-RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT-RESIDENTIAL SERVICE CHARGES
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.landstribunal.gov.uk/judgmentfiles/j499/LRX-81-2007.pdf _zView the judgment free of charge at www.landstribunal.gov.uk
942			_n0
999			_c108074 _d108074