First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Electrical Repairs

OUTCOME: Allowed

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] CHAMBER ([NAME]) Case reference : LON/00BE/LDC/2024/0218 [NAME] : [ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], London SE15 Applicant : [redacted] Representative : [NAME] Respondent : [redacted] [ADDRESS], London SE15 (as per Appendix A attached to application ) Representative : N/A Type of application : Application for dispensation from consultation – s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal members : Judge Tagliavini Mrs S Redmond MRICS Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Date of decision :

25 February 2025 DECISION

The tribunal’s summary decision

(1) The tribunal grants the applicant the dispensation from consultation sought,

in respect of both the temporary and permanent works to restore the

mains electricity supply to [ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], London

SE15.

________________________________________________________

The application

1. This is an application made pursuant to s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant

Act 1985. The applicant seeks retrospective dispensation from the statutory

consultation requirements in respect of rectifying the issues associated with

the non-operation of the mains electricity supply at the subject [NAME], which

comprises 117 purpose built flats in a development constructed 2005-2006

(‘[NAME]’).

2. The application for dispensation includes the permanent works as well as the

hire and installation of temporary electricity generators to maintain habitable

conditions in [NAME] and ensure residents receive electricity, water

and other services such as broadband, automatic gate operation, fire system

services and other communal services.. The estimated cost of the works was

said in the application to be in the region of £119.200

Background

3. In the application the applicant asserted the works were urgent, as [NAME] and all occupiers were wholly without a supply of electricity to their

flats and the communal areas. The works had been carried and completed at

the date the application was made to the tribunal on 24 July 2024.

4. An objection was received by the Mr [NAME], the leaseholder of Flat 414

dated 3 February 2025. Mr [NAME] stated that a pre-notice of intention had not

been received, despite the applicant having asserted one had been sent to all

[NAME]; the cost of the works had risen to £434,000 and costs of and

incidental to this work are excessive.

The hearing

5. Neither party requested an oral hearing and therefore, this application was

determined on the basis of the electronic bundle of 265 pages provided by the

applicant.

The tribunal’s reasons

6. The tribunal is satisfied that the works required, including the temporary hire

of generators to restore electricity to [NAME] was of the utmost urgency

and did not allow for the usual consultation with [NAME] to take place.

The tribunal finds the objections put forward by the leaseholder of Flat 414

largely concern the cost of the works and do not identity any substantial

prejudice that has been caused by the lack of consultation with the [NAME];

[NAME] v [NAME] & Others Limited [2013] UKSC 14

7. In its directions dated 6 January 2025 the tribunal specifically stated:

The only issue for the tribunal is whether it is

reasonable to dispense with the statutory consultation

requirements. This application does not concern the

issue of whether any service charge costs will be

reasonable or payable.

8. The applicant also provided the tribunal with a detailed Response dated 10

February 2025 setting out the actions taken by it to restore the electricity supply

to [NAME] and the reasons for them. The tribunal is satisfied that it is

reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements in view of the

nature of the works required and the health and safety risks potentially

arising, were power not swiftly returned to [NAME]. Continual

communication with the respondents throughout the process ensured they were

kept up to date with the steps taken by the applicant to restore an electricity

supply to [NAME].

9. Therefore, the tribunal grants the dispensation sought by the applicant.

However, this does not preclude the [NAME] from making an appropriate

application in respect of the reasonableness of the costs of this work and their

liability to pay.

Name: Judge Tagliavini

Date: 25 February 2025

Rights of appeal By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) ([NAME] 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, [NAME] 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).