VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Essential Lift Repairs

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal granted permission to a landlord to bypass certain consultation requirements for essential lift repairs in a residential building. The repairs were deemed necessary due to mobility issues among some residents.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord may be dispensed from consultation requirements if the works are essential and there is no prejudice to tenants.

Topics

tenancy disputesconsultation requirements

Provisions

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.27ZA

📖 Technical summary

The tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for essential lift repairs.

📜 Headnote Official document

The tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for essential lift repairs in a residential building. The decision was based on the lack of prejudice to tenants and the necessity of the repairs.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

1

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AU/LON/2025/0823 Applicant : [redacted] Respondent : [redacted] attached to the application Property : [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Tribunal : Judge Brilliant Date of decision : 09 December 2025

DECISION © CROWN COPYRIGHT

1. This application is for dispensation from the consultation requirements of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the 1985 Act”), pursuant to s.27ZA of the 1985 Act.

2. Section 20ZA(1) provides that: "Where an application is made to [the FTT] for a determination to dispense with all or any of the consultation requirements in relation to any qualifying works …, the tribunal may make the determination if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements."

3. The property is residential, built circa 2002, with a commercial unit on the ground floor. There are apartments over five levels,.

4. The works, which were carried out in July 2025, consisted of the replacement of a passenger lift drive unit. This followed a breakdown and diagnostic finding by appointed lift maintenance contractors.

5. There is one lift for the property. At the time of the application, 18 June 2025, the lift had been down for five weeks. These lift repairs were essential to restore

2

service to the apartments. Some of the residents have mobility issues and there are families with small babies. The quotation was for £16,798.32.

6. Directions were given on 10 October 2025. There have been no objections.

7. The leading authority on applications for dispensation is the Supreme Court’s decision in [COMPANY] v Benson [2013] UKSC 14; [2013] HLR 2.

8. In that case the Supreme Court held that the main, indeed normally, the sole question for the Tribunal when considering how to exercise its jurisdiction in accordance with s.20ZA(1) is the real prejudice to the tenants flowing from the landlord’s breach of the consultation requirements. The financial consequences for the landlord of not granting a dispensation is not a relevant factor. The Tribunal may grant dispensation on such conditions as it thinks fit: provided that any such conditions are appropriate in their nature and their effect.

9. There is no evidence before me of any prejudice and I am satisfied that it is reasonable to grant dispensation.

10. This decision only relates to dispensation, not to the reasonableness of the work done or its costs. These can be challenged before the FTT if necessary in separate proceedings.

Name: Judge Brilliant

Date: 09 December 2025

Rights of appeal

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.

3

If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).

📊 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 works are essential.
  • The works are urgent.
  • There is no prejudice to tenants.
  • There is no relevant prejudice to leaseholders.
  • The tribunal finds it reasonable to dispense with consultation requirements.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The decision allowed the landlord to bypass consultation requirements for essential lift repairs.

Who was involved?

The landlord and leaseholders of a residential building were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to grant dispensation because the repairs were essential and there was no prejudice to the tenants.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, specifically section 27ZA, was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that the repairs were essential and there was no prejudice to the tenants was crucial.

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 bypass consultation requirements if the repairs are essential and there is no prejudice to tenants.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence of the necessity of the repairs and the lack of prejudice to tenants was important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions 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 involving legal matters.

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.