VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Fire Safety Upgrades Approved Without Tenant Consultation

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tribunal allowed the landlord to bypass the usual consultation process for urgent fire safety upgrades in a residential property. The upgrades were necessary to comply with an enforcement notice issued by the Fire Authority.

⚖️ Legal holding

An applicant may obtain dispensation from consultation requirements if the work is urgent and necessary to comply with an enforcement notice.

Topics

fire safetyconsultation requirements

Provisions

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA

📖 What the law says

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, Section 20ZA allows the appropriate tribunal to grant dispensation from consultation requirements if it deems it reasonable to do so. The section defines 'qualifying works' as works on a building or premises and outlines the consultation requirements that can be dispensed with.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent fire safety upgrades.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent fire safety upgrades in a residential property. The work was required to comply with an enforcement notice issued by the Fire Authority.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : MAN/00FB/LDC/2023/0071 Property : [NAME], Driffield, [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] [APPELLANT] : [NAME] Respondents : [redacted] (See Annex A)

Type of [NAME] : Section 27A Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 – Section 20ZA Tribunal Members : Tribunal Judge [NAME] Tribunal Member [NAME] of Determination : 15th April 2024 Date of Decision : 1st May 2024

DECISION

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2024

Decision

1. The [NAME] to dispense with the consultation requirements imposed by Section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the Act”) and The Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003 relating to Qualifying Works (“QW”) is granted.

2. The QW relates to the upgrading of the fire doors to the ground and first floors and the additional work required to the second floor of the Property as referred to in a quotation from [NAME] dated 5th October 2023 as follows:-

(i) Ground Floor- 1 door (ii) First Floor – 2 double set doors (iii) Second Floor -an enclosure to be formed as specified (iv) The cost of a skip in relation to the works.

Background

3. This is an [NAME] made by [NAME] ([APPELLANT] (“the Applicant”) for the dispensation of the consultation requirements imposed by Section 20 of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 (“the Act”) and The Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003 (“the Consultation Requirements”). The work relates to the urgent upgrade of the entrance doors to the individual flats within the Property, the communal fire doors and additional fire prevention to the second floor of the Property as required by [NAME] at [NAME] (“the Property”).

4. The Applicant instructs [NAME] to act on its behalf in the management of the Property.

5. The Applicant advised an Enforcement Notice had been served by [NAME] on 26th July 2023 requiring remedial work to be completed by 19th October 2023. The deadline had been extended to 7th December 2023. The cost of the necessary work would require the Applicant to comply with the requirements of Section 20 of the Act, including the need for quotes, and this could not be completed within the time limits given.

6. The Applicant therefore applied for dispensation from the requirements of s.20 of the Act due to the urgency of the work and applied to the Tribunal for that dispensation on 14th November 2023. Directions were issued on 24th January 2024 providing for the filing of any objections by the Respondents and for the [NAME] to be listed for a paper determination.

7. No representations were received by either the Applicant or the Tribunal and the matter was thereafter listed for determination on 15th April 2024.

The Law

8. Section 20 of the Act provides:

(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 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 the 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”

9. In the event the requirements of section 20 have not been complied with, or there is insufficient time for the consultation process to be implemented, then an [NAME] may be made to the First-tier Tribunal pursuant to section 20ZA of the Act.

10. Section 20ZA of the Act provides:

(1) Where an [NAME] is made to a tribunal for a determination to dispense with all or any 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 section (3) an agreement entered into, by or on behalf of the landlord or a superior landlord, for a term of more than twelve months.

11. In [COMPANY] v Benson [2013] UKSC 14 it was determined that a Tribunal, when considering whether to grant dispensation, should consider whether the tenants would be prejudiced by any failure to comply with the Consultation Requirements.

12. In [NAME] v [NAME] and others [2021] UKUT 278 LC Upper Tribunal Judge Elizabeth Cooke said:

“There must be some prejudice to the tenants beyond the obvious fact of not being able to participate on the consultation process.”

Submissions

13. The Tribunal was provided with a copy of a sample lease for Flat 5 within the Property, copies of the enforcement notice and the quote obtained from [NAME] for the remedial work.

14. The Enforcement Notice specified the work required at the Property included the replacement of the entrance doors to the individual flats. At the time of the [NAME] this included 17 flats, one owner having already carried out the necessary work. The doors to the communal areas also required upgrading, being one door on the ground floor and 2 sets of double doors on the first floor. On the second floor further fire-proofing work was required. The cost of this work, including the provision of a skip, was £9007 plus Vat.

15. The cost of replacing the individual entrance doors was £1428 plus VAT per flat. 16. [APPELLANT]. [NAME] suggested to the Applicant that it would be beneficial if all the work was consolidated into one project and the cost could be charged back to the individual leaseholders through their service charge accounts.

17. One quote for the work was obtained from [APPELLANT]. The Applicant did not require any further quotes, being content to instruct [NAME] to carry out the work.

Determination

18. The Tribunal is being asked to exercise its discretion under section 20ZA of the Act. Section 20ZA (1) provides the Tribunal may do so where “if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements”.

19. The Tribunal cannot grant dispensation to the work to the individual entrance doors since they are part of the individual flats and are therefore the responsibility of the individual leaseholders and do not form part of either the Common Parts or the Retained Premises for which the service charge is payable.

20. Section 20 (2), as referred to above, provides it applies where: “…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…” 21. The sample lease provided to the Tribunal specifies those matters to which a contribution must be made through the service charge.

22. The First Schedule of the sample lease describes the flat as:

“Firstly flat….including …….(v) the doors and door frames and the windows and window frames together with all glass therein.”

23. The Second Schedule describes the Retained Premises as:

(1) The main structural parts of the Block including (but not by way of limitation) the roofs walls foundations floors all walls bounding or within individual flats (other than non-structural walls) and all external parts of the Block including fascias and iron work thereon and external doors.

(2) All Service Media ……

(3) The Common Parts

(4) The Service Media so far as the same serve the Common Parts

(5) [ADDRESS].

24. The Common Parts “means all parts of the Development and the Block not intended to be included in the lease of any Flat including any Service Media used in common by any two or more of the Flats”.

25. The service charge is payable for the provision of services. The Fifth Schedule of the lease describes the services to be provided by the Applicant which pertain to the Retained Premises and the Common Parts and consequently does not include the entrance doors to the flats.

26. In respect of the remaining work, the Tribunal, having considered the submissions made by the Applicant, is satisfied there is good reason to dispense with the Consultation Requirements. The Applicant has confirmed remedial work was urgently required to comply with the Enforcement Notice issued by the Fire Authority. If the Notice had not been complied with further action would have been taken.

27. The Tribunal noted the cost of this work alone would still exceed the £250 threshold for the consultation requirements of section 20 of the Act.

28. The Tribunal does not consider there is prejudice to the Respondents by the Applicant’s failure to comply with the requirements of Section 20 prior to carrying out the works.

29. The granting of dispensation does not affect the Respondents’ rights to the challenge the reasonableness or the payability of the service charges under a separate [NAME] pursuant to section 27A of the Act.

Rights of appeal

1. By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, the Tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may have.

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

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

4. If the [NAME] is not made within the 28 day time limit, such applications must include a request for 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.

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

6. If the Tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further [NAME] for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).

Annex A

Ms [NAME] A [NAME] Mr [NAME] Mr J [NAME] & Mrs [NAME] M [NAME] Mr [NAME] H [NAME] Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] A [NAME] Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] H [NAME] Mr R & Mrs [NAME] Mr [NAME] W [NAME] Mr R & [NAME] [NAME] & [NAME] [NAME] Miss [COMPANY] [NAME] & [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] & [NAME] [NAME]

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

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

  • The work was urgently needed to comply with an enforcement notice from the Fire Authority.
  • Not complying with the enforcement notice would have led to further action.
  • The cost of the communal fire safety work exceeded the £250 threshold for consultation requirements.
  • The Tribunal found no prejudice to the tenants from the applicant's failure to consult before the works.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal allowed the landlord to bypass the consultation requirements for urgent fire safety upgrades.

Who was involved?

The landlord and the residential long leaseholders were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to grant dispensation because the work was urgent and necessary to comply with an enforcement notice.

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 urgency of the work and the necessity to comply with an enforcement notice were the most important arguments.

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 may also be able to bypass consultation requirements if the work is urgent and necessary to comply with an enforcement notice.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The enforcement notice and the quote for the remedial work were important pieces of evidence.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases like this.

Official source: First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.