Pinnacle Property Management Ltd — tribunal record

“the electronic bundle is limited in scope and is difficult to navigate. Whilst I appreciate that it is not always easy to assemble this type of bundle of documents, the statement of case is extremely brief and contains no proper analysis or even acknowledgement of the issues that are relevant to an application for dispensation. There is also no statement commenting on the objections raised by the Objecting Respondents. As for the section containing copy correspondence, there is a large amount of duplication and there is no explanation as to the relevance of any particular elements of that correspondence to the issue before the tribunal.”

“there is no acknowledgement in the statement of case of the fact that a section notice was served on leaseholders after completion of the works which are the subject of this application. On the face of it, serving a section 20 notice after completing the works to which it relates is not only pointless but also potentially confusing to leaseholders. It is pointless because it seeks the leaseholders' views on how to do something that has already been done. It is potentially confusing as it could give the impression that the landlord is not in fact in breach of the section 20 requirements, thereby possibly prejudicing leaseholders who might be minded to object to the breach.”