First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for External Steps Replacement
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal granted permission to a landlord to bypass consultation requirements for replacing external steps at a property. The a person were informed of the works and costs, and no objections were raised.
⚖️ Legal holding
Dispensation from consultation requirements can be granted when tenants have been adequately notified and no objections are raised.
📖 What the law says
This section allows a tribunal to grant dispensation from consultation requirements if it finds it reasonable to do so. Consultation requirements refer to rules set by the Secretary of State regarding informing tenants about proposed works or agreements, obtaining estimates, inviting tenant suggestions, considering tenant observations, and providing reasons for certain actions.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for replacing external steps due to pre-notification and lack of objections.
📜 Headnote Official document
The tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for replacing external steps at a property. The leaseholders were informed of the works and costs, and no objections were raised.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2020
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference :
LON/00AW/LDC/2020/0154
HMCTS Code
:
P:PAPERREMOTE
Property :
60 [APPELLANT], London, [POSTCODE]
Applicant: [redacted] : [APPELLANT] Respondents : [redacted] Type of [NAME] :
[NAME] under section 20ZA to dispense with consultation requirements for replacement external steps to the building Tribunal Member : [NAME] and venue of Paper Determination : December 2020, decided on the papers. Date of Decision : 14 December 2020
DECISION
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 I. The tribunal grants dispensation in respect of the replacement external steps to the premises known as 60 [APPELLANT], London [POSTCODE].
II. 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 [NAME] 1. [APPELLANT] (‘The Applicant’) by an [NAME] dated 10 September 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.
2. 60 [APPELLANT], London [POSTCODE] (‘[NAME]’) which is the subject of the [NAME] is a purpose built block of 10 flats.
The Background 3. Directions were given in writing on 15 October 2020, for the progress of this case.
4. By 20 November 2020 the Applicant was to send a bundle of documents itemised in the Directions to the Tribunal and any Respondent who had opposed the [NAME].
5. The Directions also provided that the [NAME] could be determined on the basis of written representations. However, both parties were given the option of [NAME] a request for a hearing by 23 November 2020. Neither the Applicant nor the Respondents 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.
6. The Directions further stated that the Tribunal would not inspect [NAME] but, where necessary, will rely upon any plan and photographs provided by the parties.
1 See Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003 (SI2003/1987)
The Applicant’s case 7. The Applicant is the freeholder of the subject property, a purpose built block of flats.
8. The Respondents are the lessees of the ten flats in [NAME].
9. Works were carried out to replace the external steps to [NAME] in 2020 and invoiced on 7 October 2020.
10. At the time of the works no consultation exercise had been instigated, although the [NAME] were informed of the works required and the cost. The directors had approved the quotations.
11. The Tribunal notes that there has been no objection from the Respondents. The Tribunal’s decision 12. The Tribunal has decided that it is reasonable to dispense with the statutory consultation requirements of section 20 of the Act in relation to the replacement steps at [NAME] in 2020. Reasons for the decision 13. 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 [NAME] 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”.
14. The Tribunal finds that, although the Applicant had not undertaken a section 20 consultation exercise, they had kept the [NAME] appraised of the works at the time. No leaseholder had objected to the [NAME].
15.
Accordingly, the Tribunal is satisfied 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.
16. The Respondents will, of course, enjoy the protection of section 27A of the 1985 Act so that if they consider the costs of the work are not reasonable (on the grounds set out above or any other ground) they may make an [NAME] to the tribunal for a determination of their liability to pay the resultant service charge. Appeal
1. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) then a written [NAME] for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case.
2. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the Regional office within 28 days after the Tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the [NAME].
3. If the [NAME] is not made within the 28 day time limit, such [NAME] 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.
4. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates (i.e. give the date, [NAME] and the case number), state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking.
[NAME] of relevant legislation
Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Section 27A (1) An [NAME] 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 [NAME] 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 [NAME] 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 [NAME] 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 [COMPANY] representing them, (b) to obtain estimates for proposed works or agreements, (c) to invite tenants or the [COMPANY] 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 [COMPANY] 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) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Repairs Dispensation Without Full Consult…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation From Consultation Requirements for 2014 and 20…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Emergency Roof Repairs Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Emergency Repairs Approved Without Full Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Fire Alarm Installation Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Roof Repairs Without Full Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Repair Works Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Emergency Drainage Works Dispensation Without Pr…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Exemption for Urgent Dry Rot Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation from Consulting Tenants About Major Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Gas Riser Replacement Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Health and Safety Works
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 because the tenants were kept informed about the required works and their costs.
- The tenants did not object to the application for dispensation.
- The tribunal was satisfied that there was enough information to decide the matter without a hearing.
- The directors of the applicant company had already approved the quotations for the work.
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 consultation requirements for replacing external steps.
Who was involved?
The landlord and the leaseholders of a property were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant dispensation because the leaseholders were informed of the works and costs, and no objections were raised.
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 mattered most was that the leaseholders were informed of the works and costs, and no objections were raised.
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 be able to bypass consultation requirements if the leaseholders are informed of the works and costs, and no objections are raised.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence that the leaseholders were informed of the works and costs, and no objections were raised, mattered.
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 recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for a case like this.
