Savills (UK) Ltd — tribunal record

“Whilst the Applicant initially obtained two quotes, there is no evidence before me that the Applicant consulted leaseholders at all at any stage, whether formally or informally. This is far from ideal, and it is hard to see why some element of consultation could not have taken place.”

“Whilst the Applicant obtained two quotes, there is no evidence before me that the Applicant consulted leaseholders at all at any stage, whether formally or informally. This is far from ideal, and it is hard to see why some element of consultation could not have taken place.”

“That witness statement provides that Savills took over the management of the building on 28th September 2017 but otherwise is extremely vague. It provides no dates as to when the "major leak" was reported, when the contractors attended to investigate, what their findings were and why the works are so urgent. There is no report of the findings included in the application.”

“On 29th April 2021 an email was received from Ruby Frampton at Savills stating only that "…directions have been emailed to all leaseholders". No mention was made in relation to the application having been emailed to the leaseholders, nor was any mention made that the application had been displayed in a prominent place in the common parts of the building.”

“The application fails to explain why there has been such a delay in making this application since the works were carried out in 2017.”

“we consider this application should have been made earlier than it was, given that the applicant commissioned works to be carried out in 2017. Instead, there was undue delay in making the application which was not received until 16TH March 2021.”

“On 29th April 2021 an email was received from Ruby Frampton at Savills which confirmed only 'directions have been emailed to all leaseholders'. No mention was made in relation to the application having been emailed to the leaseholders, nor was any mention made that the application had been displayed in a prominent place in the common parts of the building.”

“Although it is unclear whether the application form or statement were also served on the leaseholders, it is noted that the directions set out in detail the works, the reason for the urgency, the estimated cost and the fact two quotes were obtained, so the leaseholders will have been made aware of these matters.”

“He does not say when this was done, although it was before the application was issued in April 2021.”

“I note that it is not immediately apparent why the works reached the threshold requiring consultation, and no explanation is provided.”

“there is no obvious reason why they could not have completed them, had the quotations been sought on the same basis, rather than allowing the contractors to bid on the basis of different work specifications.”