First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Repair Works
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal allowed a management company to bypass the usual consultation process for repair works because the work could only be done by a single contractor due to the unique materials used.
⚖️ Legal holding
A management company is entitled to dispensation from consultation requirements under s20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 if the works fall within the repairing covenants and cannot be competitively tendered.
📖 What the law says
The appropriate tribunal can grant a request to waive consultation requirements for certain works or long-term agreements if it finds it reasonable to do so. The term 'qualifying works' refers to work done on buildings or other premises, and 'qualifying long term agreement' refers to agreements lasting over twelve months between landlords or superior landlords. The 'consultation requirements' refer to rules set by the Secretary of State that require landlords to consult tenants or recognized tenants' associations regarding proposed works or agreements.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for repair works due to unique circumstances.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements under s20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for repair works on a block of flats. The works were deemed necessary to comply with lease covenants and could not be competitively tendered due to the proprietary nature of the material used.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AX/LDC/2019/0081 Property : [NAME], [ADDRESS], Kingston upon Thames, [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] [APPELLANT] : Written Application by [NAME] Respondent : [redacted] application Representative : None. Type of application : Application for dispensation from consultation requirements under s20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal members : Mr [APPELLANT] [NAME] : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 22 July 2019
DECISION
2
Decisions of the tribunal (1) The tribunal grants dispensation from the consultation requirements under s20 ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The application 1. The Applicant seeks dispensation from the consultation requirements under s20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
2. The relevant legal provisions are set out in the Appendix to this decision. The hearing 3. A written application was made by [NAME] ([NAME]). The case was decided on paper and no appearances were made. The tribunal considered the written application form and the other documents supplied. The background 4. The property which is the subject of this application is a block of 37 flats held on long leases. The block was built in approximately 1988 with the external driveway, parking spaces etc constructed from a proprietary fibre reinforced concrete manufactured and laid by Bomanite.
5. A specimen lease has been provided. A list of leaseholders has been provided with confirmation from the management company that they have been notified of the proposed works. No representations have been received objecting to the scope of the works. The works appear to fall within the repairing covenants in the lease.
6. The proposed works are to repair or renew concrete which has worn away in heavily trafficked areas. It is proposed to use Bomanite for the repairs to match the existing material. As there is only one licensed contractor in the UK for this material it is not possible to obtain competitive tenders and therefore the Applicant seeks dispensation from the consultation requirements of section 20 ZA. The tribunal’s decision 7. The tribunal grants dispensation from the consultation requirements of under s20 ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003.
3 This does not affect the rights of challenge of reasonableness and payability of service charges under s27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. Reasons for the tribunal’s decision 8. The works are required to comply with covenants in the various leases. The tribunal recognises the unusual circumstances in this case but does not consider the leaseholders would be prejudiced by this decision as they have been consulted even if the precise form of the consultation is not in accordance with the regulations by not seeking competitive tenders. The leaseholders are aware of the position and have not objected. Name: [NAME] [NAME]: 22 July 2019
4 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).
5 Appendix of relevant legislation
S20 Limitation of service charges: consultation requirements
(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.[FN1]
6 [FN1] ss.20-20ZA substituted for s.20 subject to savings specified in SI 2004/669 art.2(d)(i)-(vi) by Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act (2002 c.15), Pt 2 c 5 s 151
[POSTCODE] Consultation requirements: supplementary
(1) 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.
(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 [NAME], 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.[...] [FN1]
7 [FN1] ss.20-20ZA substituted for s.20 subject to savings specified in SI 2004/669 art.2(d)(i)-(vi) by Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act (2002 c.15), Pt 2 c 5 s 151
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation from Consultation Requirements
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Management Company Allowed to Bypass Consultation Requirements for Urgent R…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Allows Asbestos Removal Without Leaseholder Consultatio…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Temporary Heat Alarm System
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Lift Repairs Without Consultati…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Fire Safety Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Lift Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Fire Safety Survey Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Repairs Without Consulta…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Asbestos Removal
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 fall within the repairing covenants.
- The management company demonstrates the need to bypass consultation requirements.
- The works are urgent and necessary.
- There is no prejudice to leaseholders.
- The works are urgent and cost-effective.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- (No factors identified that went against the claimant in the provided cases.)
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
It decided to grant dispensation from the consultation requirements for repair works.
Who was involved?
The management company of a block of flats and the leaseholders of those flats.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant dispensation because the works were necessary to comply with lease covenants and could not be competitively tendered.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA and the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that the works could not be competitively tendered due to the proprietary nature of the material used.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
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 seek dispensation if their repair works cannot be competitively tendered.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence included the need for the works to comply with lease covenants and the inability to obtain competitive tenders.
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?
Yes, it is recommended to get a solicitor for a case like this to ensure proper representation.
