Emergency Repairs Approved Without Leaseholder Consultation

OUTCOME: Allowed

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00BF/LDC/2025/0622 Property : 17-22 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [COMPANY] Respondents : [redacted] Representative :

None

Type of [NAME] :

For dispensation from the consultation requirements under Section 20ZA Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal :

Mr [APPELLANT] (Hons) LLM Property Law MA FRICS

Date of Decision : 13 May 2025

DECISION

This has been a remote paper determination, which has been consented to by the parties. A face-to-face hearing was not held because it was not practicable, and no one requested same.

The documents the Tribunal were referred to were in a bundle of some 51 pages.

Decision

(1) The Tribunal determines that unconditional dispensation should be granted from the consultation requirements from Section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (the Act) in respect of the property 17-22 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]. (2) We make no determination as to the reasonableness of the costs of same, these being matters which can be considered, if necessary, under the provisions of s27A and s19 of the Act. The [NAME]

1. This [NAME] received 22 January 2025, is made by [NAME], on behalf of, the [NAME], [COMPANY].

2. The [NAME] seeks dispensation from the consultation requirements under Section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

3. The [NAME] is concerned solely with the question of what consultation if any should be given of the consultation requirements of Section 20 of the 1985 for works costing in excess of £250 per flat. It is not concerned with the reasonableness or payability of any service charges which may arise. The Determination 4. A written [NAME] was made by [COMPANY]. The Tribunal considered the written bundle of 51 pages, in support of the [NAME]. Background The property 5. The Property is a late Victorian semi-detached building converted to six self- contained flats. The building itself comprises a ground, first and second floors, the second floor being incorporated within the roof space which is tiled with dormers to side and rear planes.

6. The [NAME] is made for “qualifying works”. The Form notes under “Grounds for Seeking Dispensation”; specifically, “that the roof was leaking into the top floor flat and emergency repairs were carried out to minimise the internal damage into the flat.” 7. The Directions dated 20 March 2025, provided for a copy of the [NAME] form and directions to be served on the leaseholders. This was confirmed done by [NAME] by email dated 21 March 2025.

8. The Directions also note that any [NAME] who opposes the [NAME] should by the 21 April 2025 complete the reply form and return it to the Tribunal. The Landlord may by the 02 May 2025 provide a brief reply to any [NAME] who opposes the [NAME].

9. The Landlord confirmed to the Tribunal within their Statement of Case within the bundle that no objections had been received.

11. The only issue for the Tribunal is whether or not it is reasonable to dispense with the statutory consultation requirements of Section 20 of the 1985 Act. This [NAME] does not concern the issue of whether any service charge costs will be reasonable or payable. Documents 12. The Tribunal has had recourse to the Bundle of 51 pages which includes the [NAME] form, Directions, quotations and a copy of a specimen lease. The Tribunal’s decision 13. The Tribunal grants dispensation under Section 20 ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the Service Charges (Consultation) (England) 2003 for the works set out in the [NAME].

14. We are, aware of the judgment in [COMPANY] v Benson and others [2013] UKSC 14. The [NAME] for dispensation is not challenged.

15. The Supreme Court (Lord [NAME] at para 50) accepted that there must be real prejudice to the tenants. Indeed, the Respondents do not oppose the [NAME]. It is accepted that we have the power to grant dispensation on such terms as we think fit. However, the Landlord is entitled to decide the identity of the contractors who carry out the work, when they are done, by

whom and the amount. The safety net for the Respondents is to be found in Sections 19 and 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

16.

Accordingly, we find that unconditional dispensation should be granted.

17. Our decision is in respect of the dispensation from the provisions of s20 of the Act only. It is open to the opposing [NAME] or others to apply under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Section 27A, should there be concerns over the payability and reasonableness of the service charge, these may include concerns over necessity, quality of work and its cost. [NAME]: [NAME]

13 May 2025

ANNEX – RIGHTS OF APPEAL

1. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) then a written [NAME] for permission must be made to the First-Tier at the [NAME] which has been dealing with the case.

2. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the [NAME] within 28 days after the Tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the [NAME].

3. If the [NAME] is not made within the 28-day time limit, such [NAME] must include a request to an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28-day time limit; the Tribunal will then look at such reason(s) and decide whether to allow the [NAME] for permission to appeal to proceed despite not being within the time limit.

4. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates (ie give the date, the property and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking