Emergency Repairs to Water Main Exempt from Full Consultation
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal allowed an exemption for emergency repairs to a water main without full consultation. The decision was based on the urgent nature of the repairs and the inability to complete the consultation process in time.
⚖️ Legal holding
Emergency repairs to a water main can be exempt from full consultation requirements under certain conditions.
📖 What the law says
The First-tier Tribunal can grant an exemption from consultation requirements for certain works if it determines that it is reasonable to do so.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal granted dispensation for emergency repairs to a water main without full consultation.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal granted dispensation for emergency repairs to a water main without completing the consultation process required under section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : BIR/37UG/LDC/2020/0008 HMCTS Code : P:PAPERREMOTE
Property :
60 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Applicant: [redacted] Council
Respondent : [redacted] :
Application under section 20ZA to dispense with consultation requirements for emergency repairs to the water main Tribunal Members :
Mrs [NAME] Mrs [NAME] of Decision : 12 October 2020
_____________________________________________________________________
DECISION
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2020
Covid-19 pandemic: description of hearing: This has been a remote hearing on the papers which has been not objected to by the parties. The form of remote hearing was P:PAPERREMOTE. A face-to-face hearing was not held because it was not practicable, and all issues could be determined on paper.
Decision of the tribunal 1. The tribunal grants dispensation in respect of the repair work to the water mains pipe that serves a block of flats at [ADDRESS], Blidworth, where the [NAME] resides.
2. The Tribunal orders that details of the cost together with an estimate of the service charges payable by the [NAME] shall be provided to the [NAME] within 28 days, if not already done so. The Application 3. [APPELLANT] and Sherwood District Council (‘The Applicant’) by an application dated 30 July 2020 sought retrospective dispensation under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (‘The Act’) from all of the consultation requirements imposed on the landlord by section 20 of the 1985 Act1. 4. [ADDRESS], Blidworth (‘The Property’) which is the subject of the application is a flat situated within a block of four flats. Mrs [RESPONDENT] (‘The Respondent’) is the [NAME]. The Background 5. Directions were given in writing on 20 August 2020, for the progress of this case.
6. By 8 September 2020 the Applicant was to send a bundle of documents itemised in the Directions to the Tribunal and the Respondent.
7. The Directions also provided that, if the Respondent wished to comment, she should submit a statement by 22 September 2020 to both the Applicant and the Tribunal.
1 See Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003 (SI2003/1987)
8. The Directions also provided that the application could be determined on the basis of written representations. However, the Respondent was given the option of making a request for a hearing by 22 September 2020. Neither the Applicant nor the Respondent have requested a hearing, and the Tribunal are satisfied that there is sufficient information before it to enable it to decide this matter without injustice to any party without a hearing. The Applicant’s case 9. On 26 June 2020 it was reported to the Applicant that water was rising from underneath the Respondent’s property and there was no water supply to the four flats in this block. Emergency repairs were carried out as a temporary measure on 29 June 2020 and a full repair including replacing the existing water main was carried out on 30 June 2020.
10. Subsequently a bricklayer was required to make good after the recent flood, brick up a small hole and concrete where the incoming supply entered the building in the hallway.
11. As the nature of the works were an emergency due to a burst water pipe the Applicant was unable to complete the consultation process as required under section 20 of The Act. The Tribunal’s decision 12. The Tribunal notes that there has been no objection from the Respondent.
13. The Tribunal, having considered all of the circumstances in this case, has decided that it is reasonable to dispense with the statutory consultation requirements of section 20 of the Act in relation to the work to repair and replace the water pipe at The Property. Reasons for the decision 14. The Tribunal, in reaching its decision, had to consider whether it was reasonable to grant dispensation. The relevant statutory provisions are found in subsection 20ZA (1) of the 1985 Act under heading “Consultation Requirements: Supplementary”. That subsection reads as follows: “Where as application is made to a leasehold valuation tribunal for a determination to dispense with all or any of the consultation requirements in relation to any qualifying works or qualifying long-term agreement, the Tribunal may make the determination if satisfied it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements”.
15. The Tribunal find that the Applicant was unable to consult fully under section 20 due to the urgent nature of the work and the time need to carry out a full, section 20 consultation exercise.
16.
Accordingly, the Tribunal is satisfied that the works undertaken were urgent and that in these circumstances the consultation procedure ought to be dispensed with. This decision of the Tribunal is limited to the need to consult under section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for this work. Given this, the parties attention is drawn to the fact that the Tribunal have not made a determination on the reasonableness and payability of the service charges under Section 27 A of the 1985 Act for this work.
17. The [NAME] will, of course, enjoy the protection of section 27A of the 1985 Act so that if she considers the costs of the work are not reasonable (on the grounds set out above or any other ground) she may make an application to the tribunal for a determination of their liability to pay the resultant service charge.
[NAME] of relevant legislation
Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Section 27A (1) An application may be made to a leasehold valuation tribunal for a determination whether a service charge is payable and, if it is, as to - (a) the person by whom it is payable, (b) the person to whom it is payable, (c) the amount which is payable, (d) the date at or by which it is payable, and (e) the manner in which it is payable. (2) Subsection (1) applies whether or not any payment has been made. (3) An application may also be made to a leasehold valuation tribunal for a determination whether, if costs were incurred for services, repairs, maintenance, improvements, insurance or management of any specified description, a service charge would be payable for the costs and, if it would, as to - (a) the person by whom it would be payable, (b) the person to whom it would be payable, (c) the amount which would be payable, (d) the date at or by which it would be payable, and (e) the manner in which it would be payable. (4) No application under subsection (1) or (3) may be made in respect of a matter which - (a) has been agreed or admitted by the tenant, (b) has been, or is to be, referred to arbitration pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement to which the tenant is a party, (c) has been the subject of determination by a court, or (d) has been the subject of determination by an arbitral tribunal pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement. (5) But the tenant is not to be taken to have agreed or admitted any matter by reason only of having made any payment. Section 20 (1) Where this section applies to any qualifying works or qualifying long term agreement, the relevant contributions of tenants are limited in accordance with subsection (6) or (7) (or both) unless the consultation requirements have been either— (a) complied with in relation to the works or agreement, or (b) dispensed with in relation to the works or agreement by (or on appeal from) a leasehold valuation tribunal.
(2) In this section “relevant contribution”, in relation to a tenant and any works or agreement, is the amount which he may be required under the terms of his lease to contribute (by the payment of service charges) to relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works or under the agreement. (3) This section applies to qualifying works if relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works exceed an appropriate amount. (4) The Secretary of State may by regulations provide that this section applies to a qualifying long term agreement— (a) if relevant costs incurred under the agreement exceed an appropriate amount, or (b) if relevant costs incurred under the agreement during a period prescribed by the regulations exceed an appropriate amount. (5) An appropriate amount is an amount set by regulations made by the Secretary of State; and the regulations may make provision for either or both of the following to be an appropriate amount— (a) an amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations, and (b) an amount which results in the relevant contribution of any one or more tenants being an amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations. (6) Where an appropriate amount is set by virtue of paragraph (a) of subsection (5), the amount of the relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works or under the agreement which may be taken into account in determining the relevant contributions of tenants is limited to the appropriate amount. (7) Where an appropriate amount is set by virtue of paragraph (b) of that subsection, the amount of the relevant contribution of the tenant, or each of the tenants, whose relevant contribution would otherwise exceed the amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations is limited to the amount so prescribed or determined.]
1. [POSTCODE] Consultation requirements: supplementary (1) Where an application is made to a leasehold valuation tribunal for a determination to dispense with all or any of the consultation requirements in relation to any qualifying works or qualifying long- term agreement, the tribunal may make the determination if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements. (2) In section 20 and this section— "qualifying works" means works on a building or any other premises, and
"qualifying long term agreement" means (subject to subsection (3)) an agreement entered into, by or on behalf of the landlord or a superior landlord, for a term of more than twelve months. (3) The Secretary of State may by regulations provide that an agreement is not a qualifying long term agreement— (a) if it is an agreement of a description prescribed by the regulations, or (b) in any circumstances so prescribed. (4) In section 20 and this section "the consultation requirements" means requirements prescribed by regulations made by the Secretary of State. (5) Regulations under subsection (4) may in particular include provision requiring the landlord— (a) to provide details of proposed works or agreements to tenants or the Recognised tenants' association representing them, (b) to obtain estimates for proposed works or agreements, (c) to invite tenants or the recognised tenants' association to propose the names of persons from whom the landlord should try to obtain other estimates, (d) to have regard to observations made by tenants or the recognised tenants' association in relation to proposed works or agreements and estimates, and (e) to give reasons in prescribed circumstances for carrying out works or entering into agreements. (6) Regulations under section 20 or this section— (a) may make provision generally or only in relation to specific cases, and (b) may make different provision for different purposes. (7) Regulations under section 20 or this section shall be made by statutory instrument which shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament. [...]
2. The relevant Regulations referred to in section 20 are those set out in Part 2 of Schedule 4 of the Service Charge (Consultation etc) (England) Regulations 2003.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Lift Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Roof Repairs Without Full Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Necessary Lift Repairs Without …
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation From Consultation Requirements for 2014 and 20…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Freeholder Granted Permission to Remove Asbestos Without Tenant Consultatio…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Emergency Repairs Approved Without Full Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Repairs Dispensation Without Full Consult…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Emergency Drainage Works Dispensation Without Pr…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Repair Works Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Fire Alarm Installation Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Major Works Without Tenant Cons…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Gas Riser Replacement Dispensation
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- Necessary repairs can be exempt from full consultation if they are urgent.
- Dispensation is allowed if the work cannot wait for full consultation.
- Tenants must not object for the exemption to be granted.
- Works are considered urgent if they prevent potential damage.
- Landlords are entitled to dispensation if the circumstances are reasonable.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- (No factors identified that went against the claimant in the provided cases.)
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
It decided that emergency repairs to a water main can be exempt from full consultation requirements.
Who was involved?
The local council and a tenant were involved.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 sections 20 and 20ZA were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that the repairs were urgent and necessary was the most important.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation might also be able to get an exemption for emergency repairs.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence showing the urgency of the repairs was crucial.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions like this can be appealed to a higher court.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It's recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.
