AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·20 February 2024

First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Critical Heating Works

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal granted permission to skip certain consultation steps required by law for critical heating works in a retirement property. This decision was made because the works were deemed necessary and no harm came to the tenants.

⚖️ Legal holding

It is reasonable to dispense with the statutory consultation requirements for critical heating works.

Topics

tenancyconsultation requirementsLandlord and Tenant Act 1985

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

This section allows a tribunal to grant dispensation from consultation requirements for certain works or long-term agreements if it finds it reasonable to do so. The consultation requirements themselves are defined by regulations set by the Secretary of State.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for critical heating works.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements under s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for critical heating works in a retirement property. The decision was based on the necessity of the works and the lack of prejudice to the tenants.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : CAM/00KF/LDC/2023/0022 Property :

[ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], Southchurch, Southend on Sea, Essex [POSTCODE]

Applicant : [redacted] :

Respondents : [redacted] application Representative :

Type of application : For the dispensation of some of the consultation requirements under s.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal member :

Judge Simon Brilliant

Date of decision : 20 July 2023

DECISION

Decision of the Tribunal The Tribunal determines that those parts of the consultation requirements provided for by s.20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 ("the Act") which have not been complied with are to be dispensed with.

The application 1. The Applicant seeks a determination pursuant to s.20ZA of the Act for the dispensation of all or any of the consultation requirements provided for by s.20 of the Act. The application was dated 05 April 2023.

2. Directions of the Tribunal were issued on 12 June 2023.

3. The case was listed for a paper determination. No request had been made by any of the parties for an oral hearing. The hearing 4. The matter was determined by way of a paper hearing which took place on 20 July 2023. The background 5. [ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], Southchurch, Southend on Sea, Essex [POSTCODE] is an attractive development of 31 retirement flats. The application 6. The landlord has applied for retrospective dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements in respect of works to the heating/hot water pumps at the Property. The works were carried out without dispensation being applied for due to them being stated to be critical to heating and hot water within the development.

7. In April 2023 [COMPANY] carried out the following work in accordance with their estimate dated 08 March 2023: Description: REMEDIAL WORK- PUMP 2 & PUMP 3 SHUT DOWN REQUIRED To attend site and carry out the following: (PUMP 2) Replacement pump ½” AAV valve to be installed on the Volute. 1 x ½” female valve. 1 x ½” nipple. 1 x ½” male aav. (PUMP 3) Sensor replacement. Pressurisation unit: Isolation and drain kit. 1 x 300 litre vessel. 1 x 1/2" female valve. 1 x 1/2" nipple. 1 x 1/2 male AAV. 1 x pump. 1 x sensor. 1 x back entry ¼” 0-4 bar gauge. Fully test upon completion. Remove all redundant materials from site. Breakdown of costs: Materials-£7,673.40 Labour-£1,730.00 Total-£9,403.40 + VAT = £11,248.08

8. No objections to the application were received from any of the Respondents. There is no evidence of any prejudice suffered by them as a result of there having been no statutory consultation.

9. The only issue for the Tribunal is whether it is reasonable to dispense with the statuto1y consultation requirements. This application does not concern the issue of whether any service charge costs will be reasonable or payable.

Decision of the tribunal 10. s.20 of the Act provides for the limitation of service charges in the event that the statutory consultation requirements are not met. The consultation requirements apply where the works are qualifying works (as in this case) and only £250 can be recovered from a tenant in respect of such works unless the consultation requirements have either been complied with or dispensed with.

11. Dispensation is dealt with by s.20ZA of the Act which provides:- "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"

12. The Tribunal is satisfied that, in the particular circumstances of this case, the works being critical to heating and hot water within the development it is reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements in respect of these works.

13. The Tribunal's determination is limited to this application for dispensation of consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the Act.

Name:

[NAME]: 20 July 2023

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

Allowed12 cases

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 works are critical for heating.

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 skip certain consultation steps required by law for critical heating works.

Who was involved?

The landlord of a retirement property and the tenants of the property.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided that it was reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements because the works were critical and no prejudice was caused to the tenants.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 sections 20 and 20ZA.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The necessity of the works and the lack of any harm to the tenants.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was in favour of the landlord.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation might also be able to skip consultation steps if the works are critical and no harm comes to the tenants.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The estimate and description of the critical heating works.

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 is recommended to seek legal 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.