First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Additional Works
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal granted permission to the landlord to carry out additional works without needing to consult the leaseholders again, as long as the initial consultation requirements were met and no leaseholder would be unfairly affected.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord is entitled to dispensation from consulting leaseholders for additional works if the requirements have been met and no prejudice is suffered by the leaseholders.
📖 What the law says
The First-tier Tribunal can grant a landlord dispensation from consulting leaseholders for additional works if it is reasonable to do so. The term 'qualifying works' refers to works on a building or premises, and 'qualifying long term agreement' means an agreement lasting over twelve months. The Secretary of State can regulate these terms further. The 'consultation requirements' refer to rules set by the Secretary of State regarding providing details of proposed works or agreements to tenants, obtaining estimates, inviting tenants to suggest estimators, considering tenant observations, and giving reasons for certain actions.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal granted dispensation to the landlord from consulting leaseholders for additional works.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal granted dispensation to the landlord from consulting leaseholders for additional works to the Lancaster Gate Porticos and Façade works, finding that the requirements were met and no prejudice would be suffered by the leaseholders.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00BK/LDC/2019/0067 Property : 75-79 Lancaster Gate, London [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] Representative : [NAME] [RESPONDENT] Respondent : [redacted] application. Representative : In person Type of application : Application for Dispensation under S.20ZA Landlord & Tenant Act 1985. Tribunal members : Miss. [APPELLANT]. [APPELLANT] : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 4 July 2019
DECISION
Decisions of the tribunal (1) The tribunal grants dispensation from the requirements to consult leaseholders in relation to additional works to the Lancaster Gate Porticos and Façade works as described in the application dated 29 April 2019.
Background: (2) The tribunal received an application under S.20ZA of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 in which the applicants seek dispensation from the requirements to consult leaseholders in relation to additional works to be carried out at the property. (3) The further background is that in 2017 following a full consultation under S.20 of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985, the applicants entered into a contract for the repair of the facades in the building (“the façade works”). Following further investigation it was determined that additional façade works were necessary and leaseholders were informed that the existing contract sum would increase by approximately 10%. A notice of intention was served on the leaseholders on 28 June 2018 giving them until 28 July to make any responses. (4) Meetings were held between the Board and the contractors (“[NAME]”) who were undertaking the major works, with the result that a specification of the additional works was agreed in March 2019, but that it was difficult for alternative quotations to be obtained mainly because the additional work was of a relatively low value, and contractors felt they would have little chance of securing the work, given that [NAME] were already on site and had the skills to complete the work themselves. (5) A statement of estimates was served on the respondents on 29 March 2019, in relation to the additional works. The leaseholders had until 1 May to make observations, but at the date of the application to the tribunal none had been received. (6) The applicant seeks dispensation and says that in the event the tribunal finds it has not complied with the consultation requirements, that dispensation be granted in relation to the additional façade works. (7) Directions were issued by the tribunal which required any respondent who opposed the application to reply. The tribunal has not received any opposition from the respondents. The issues
1. The issue for the tribunal is whether or not it should grant dispensation, and whether any of the respondent leaseholders would be prejudiced if dispensation were to be granted.
2. It is important for the respondents to understand that the application relates purely to if the tribunal should grant dispensation, and not whether the cost of any works is recoverable or reasonable.: The tribunal’s decision 3. The tribunal determines that dispensation should be granted in relation to the additional works as identified in the application.
. Reasons for the tribunal’s decision 4. The tribunal considers that the applicants have complied with the requirements to consult in relation to the main contract and that no prejudice would be suffered by any of the respondents in relation to the additional works, since notices of intention and estimates have been served, and the respondents have been given an opportunity to respond. In addition, the tribunal has not received any correspondence from any of the respondents opposing the application, and the tribunal is satisfied from the documents supplied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements to consult leaseholders in relation to the additional works.
Name: [NAME]: 4 July 2019
Rights of appeal
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.
If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), then a written application for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with the case. The application for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office within 28 days after the tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the person making the application. If the application is not made within the 28-day time limit, such application 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 application for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The application 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 grounds of appeal and state the result the party making the application is seeking. If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
Appendix of relevant legislation
Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (as amended) Section 18 (1) In the following provisions of this Act "service charge" means an amount payable by a tenant of a dwelling as part of or in addition to the rent - (a) which is payable, directly or indirectly, for services, repairs, maintenance, improvements or insurance or the landlord's costs of management, and (b) the whole or part of which varies or may vary according to the relevant costs. (2) The relevant costs are the costs or estimated costs incurred or to be incurred by or on behalf of the landlord, or a [NAME], in connection with the matters for which the service charge is payable. (3) For this purpose - (a) "costs" includes overheads, and (b) costs are relevant costs in relation to a service charge whether they are incurred, or to be incurred, in the period for which the service charge is payable or in an earlier or later period. Section 19 (1) Relevant costs shall be taken into account in determining the amount of a service charge payable for a period - (a) only to the extent that they are reasonably incurred, and (b) where they are incurred on the provisions of services or the carrying out of works, only if the services or works are of a reasonable standard; and the amount payable shall be limited accordingly. (2) Where a service charge is payable before the relevant costs are incurred, no greater amount than is reasonable is so payable, and after the relevant costs have been incurred any necessary adjustment shall be made by repayment, reduction or subsequent charges or otherwise. Section 27A (1) An application may be made to the appropriate 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 the appropriate 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) the appropriate 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.] Section 20B (1) If any of the relevant costs taken into account in determining the amount of any service charge were incurred more than 18 months before a demand for payment of the service charge is served on the tenant, then (subject to subsection (2)), the tenant shall not be liable to pay so much of the service charge as reflects the costs so incurred. (2) Subsection (1) shall not apply if, within the period of 18 months beginning with the date when the relevant costs in question were incurred, the tenant was notified in writing that those costs had been incurred and that he would subsequently be required under the terms of his lease to contribute to them by the payment of a service charge. Section 20C (1) A tenant may make an application for an order that all or any of the costs incurred, or to be incurred, by the landlord in connection with proceedings before a court, residential property tribunal or the Upper Tribunal, or in connection with arbitration proceedings, are not to be regarded as relevant costs to be taken into account in determining the amount of any service charge payable by the tenant or any other person or persons specified in the application. (2) The application shall be made— (a) in the case of court proceedings, to the court before which the proceedings are taking place or, if the application is made after the proceedings are concluded, to a county court;
(aa) in the case of proceedings before a residential property tribunal, to that tribunal; (b) in the case of proceedings before a residential property tribunal, to the tribunal before which the proceedings are taking place or, if the application is made after the proceedings are concluded, to any residential property tribunal; (c) in the case of proceedings before the Upper Tribunal, to the tribunal; (d) in the case of arbitration proceedings, to the arbitral tribunal or, if the application is made after the proceedings are concluded, to a county court. (3) The court or tribunal to which the application is made may make such order on the application as it considers just and equitable in the circumstances. Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 Schedule 11, paragraph 1 (1) In this Part of this Schedule “administration charge” means an amount payable by a tenant of a dwelling as part of or in addition to the rent which is payable, directly or indirectly— (a) for or in connection with the grant of approvals under his lease, or applications for such approvals, (b) for or in connection with the provision of information or documents by or on behalf of the landlord or a person who is party to his lease otherwise than as landlord or tenant, (c) in respect of a failure by the tenant to make a payment by the due date to the landlord or a person who is party to his lease otherwise than as landlord or tenant, or (d) in connection with a breach (or alleged breach) of a covenant or condition in his lease. (2) But an amount payable by the tenant of a dwelling the rent of which is registered under Part 4 of the Rent Act 1977 (c. 42) is not an administration charge, unless the amount registered is entered as a variable amount in pursuance of section 71(4) of that Act. (3) In this Part of this Schedule “variable administration charge” means an administration charge payable by a tenant which is neither— (a) specified in his lease, nor (b) calculated in accordance with a formula specified in his lease. (4) An order amending sub-paragraph (1) may be made by the appropriate national authority. Schedule 11, paragraph 2
A variable administration charge is payable only to the extent that the amount of the charge is reasonable. Schedule 11, paragraph 5 (1) An application may be made to the appropriate tribunal for a determination whether an administration 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) Sub-paragraph (1) applies whether or not any payment has been made. (3) The jurisdiction conferred on the appropriate tribunal in respect of any matter by virtue of sub-paragraph (1) is in addition to any jurisdiction of a court in respect of the matter. (4) No application under sub-paragraph (1) 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. (6) An agreement by the tenant of a dwelling (other than a post-dispute arbitration agreement) is void in so far as it purports to provide for a determination— (a) in a particular manner, or (b) on particular evidence, of any question which may be the subject matter of an application under sub-paragraph (1).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation from Consultation Requirements
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Assured Tenancy Rent Based on Market Value
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Fire Safety Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Damp Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Freeholder Granted Dispensation for Emergency Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Freeholder Granted Permission to Skip Consultation for Urgent Structural Wo…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Tenancy Based on Market Value
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Extensive Façade Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Orders Service Charge Variation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rules on Service Charge Reasonableness
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 tribunal granted dispensation for additional works because the applicants had already consulted for the main contract.
- The leaseholders would not be harmed by the dispensation for additional works because they had received notices and estimates.
- The tribunal did not receive any objections from the leaseholders regarding the application for dispensation.
- It was difficult to get other quotes for the additional work because it was low value and the current contractors were already on site.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tribunal granted dispensation to the landlord from consulting leaseholders for additional works.
Who was involved?
The landlord and various leaseholders were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant dispensation because the initial consultation requirements were met and no leaseholder would suffer prejudice.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, specifically Section 20ZA, was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the initial consultation requirements were met and no leaseholder would suffer prejudice.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the landlord.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation might also be able to obtain dispensation if they meet the consultation requirements and ensure no prejudice to leaseholders.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence of the initial consultation and the necessity of the additional works were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) within 28 days.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to get advice from a qualified solicitor for a case like this.
