VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Insulation Works

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord's request to skip consulting tenants about necessary roof repairs due to their urgency and minimal impact on residents. This ruling applies when landlords need to act quickly for safety or structural reasons without causing harm to a person.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord may obtain dispensation from consultation requirements if it is reasonable to do so, considering the urgency of necessary works and lack of prejudice to tenants.

Topics

Landlord and tenant lawConsultation requirements

Provisions

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZAService Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003

📖 What the law says

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA

The First-tier Tribunal can grant an application to waive consultation requirements for certain works or long-term agreements if it finds it reasonable to do so.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent roof insulation works under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal granted an application by the landlord to dispense with consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for urgent roof insulation works. The decision was based on the necessity and urgency of the work, as well as the lack of prejudice to tenants.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025 FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : HAV/21UC/LDC/2026/0050 Property : [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [COMPANY] Respondents : [redacted] Mr S French & Miss [NAME] – flat 2 Miss [NAME] – flat 3 Mr [NAME] – flat 4 Mr & Mrs [NAME] – flat 5 Mrs [COUNSEL] – flat 6 The late Mrs [COUNSEL] – flat 7 Representative : None Type of application : To dispense with the requirement to consult lessees about major works under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal members : Judge Taylor Date and Venue of hearing : 5 May 2026, on the papers Date of decision : 5 May 2026

2

DECISION Decision of the Tribunal The Tribunal grants the application for the dispensation of all or any of the consultation requirements provided for by section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (Section 20ZA of the same Act) in relation to works to instal new insulation in the flat roof structure of the Property. The application 1. The Applicant seeks dispensation under Section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the Act”) from the consultation requirements in relation to certain “Qualifying Works” (as defined by the Act). The application was received on 18 March 2026.

2. This matter has been dealt with without a hearing pursuant to Rule 31 of the Tribunal Procedure Rules 2013 and the Tribunal’s Directions dated 30 March 2026. No objections were received to that approach.

3. The Property is described in the application as a purpose-built block containing seven residential flats, across four storeys, constructed in or around the 1980’s.

4. The Applicant is the [COMPANY] and the Respondents are the seven [NAME]. Under clause 5 of the Leases of the flats the Applicant covenanted (amongst other things) to maintain and repair:” the main structure and in particular the roofs gutters and rain water pipes of the Building”.

5. The application relates to work that is required to replace the insulation to the flat roof structure of the Property, which has been discovered to be wet with condensation. The requirement for the work has been discovered during renovation work by the (new) owners of the top floor flat, flat 7; the ceiling of flat 7 was removed during the renovation work and the disrepair to the roof insulation was found.

6. The Qualifying Works for which dispensation is sought are described in the quotations provided by the Applicant as the fitting of new 100 mm Celotex insulation in the roof area above flat 7.

3 7. The Applicant says that a notice of intention under the consultation requirements of section 20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 was served on the [NAME] on 17 March 2026 but has not provided any further information on consultation with the [NAME].

8. The only response to the application from the Respondents has come from Mrs [NAME], the owner of flat 6. Mrs [NAME] confirms that she agrees with the application. The Issues 9. This decision is confined to determination of the issue of dispensation from the consultation requirements in respect of the qualifying works. The Tribunal has made no determination on whether the costs are payable or reasonable. If a leaseholder wishes to challenge the payability or reasonableness of those costs as service charges, including the possible application or effect of the Building Safety Act 2022, then a separate application under section 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 would have to be made. The Law 10.Section 20 of the Act and the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003 require a landlord planning to undertake major works, where a leaseholder will be required to contribute over £250 towards those works, to consult the [NAME] in a specified form.

11. It is possible to obtain dispensation from compliance with these requirements by an application such as this one before the Tribunal. Essentially the Tribunal must be satisfied that it is reasonable to do so. 12.Section 20ZA of the Act, subsection (1) provides as follows: 'Where an application is made to a 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.' 13.The Supreme Court in the case of [COMPANY] v Benson and others [2013] UKSC 14 set out certain principles relevant to section 20ZA. Lord [NAME], having clarified that the purpose of sections 19 to 20ZA of the Act was to ensure that tenants are

4 protected from paying for inappropriate works and paying more than would be appropriate, went on to state 'it seems to me that the issue on which the [tribunal] should focus when entertaining an application by a landlord under section 20ZA(1) must be the extent, if any, to which the tenants were prejudiced in either respect by the failure of the landlord to comply with the requirements'. The Tribunal’s decision 14.The Applicant supplied to the Tribunal quotations from two contractors which set out detail of the Qualifying Works required in respect of the fitting of new insulation in the roof area above the ceiling of flat 7. 15.The works are said to be urgent because they need to be done while the ceiling is removed and the owners of flat 7 need to complete the renovation works so that they can move into the property. 16.The Tribunal is satisfied on the evidence before it that the works to instal new insulation in the roof area is necessary and needs to be completed urgently. The Tribunal accepts the Applicant’s evidence that the work must be completed urgently, while the ceiling of flat 7 has been removed, so the owners of flat 7 can reinstate the ceiling and move into that flat.

17. The Tribunal is satisfied, considering that there have been no objections to this application from the Respondents and the only reply from Mrs [NAME] supports the application, that there is no evidence that the Respondents would suffer prejudice by the granting of dispensation relating to works. 18.In the circumstances set out above, the Tribunal considers it reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements. Dispensation is granted pursuant to section 20ZA of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985. Rights of appeal 1. A person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) must seek permission to do so by making written application

5 to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case.

2. The application must arrive at the Tribunal within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision. Where possible you should send your further application for permission to appeal by email to [EMAIL] as this will enable the First-tier Tribunal to deal with it more efficiently.

3. If the person wishing to appeal does not comply with the 28-day time limit, the person shall include with the application for permission to appeal a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28-day time limit; the Tribunal will then decide whether to extend time or not to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed.

4. The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party making the application is seeking

📊 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 landlord acted reasonably considering the urgency of the necessary works.
  • There was no prejudice suffered by the tenants.
  • The works were necessary to prevent further damage.
  • The landlord considered the urgency and necessity of the works.
  • The landlord sought dispensation only where it was reasonable to do so.

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's request to skip consulting tenants about necessary roof repairs.

Who was involved?

A landlord and several tenant leaseholders in a multi-flat building.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided that it was reasonable to grant dispensation due to the urgency of the work and lack of prejudice to tenants.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) Regulations 2003.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The landlord argued that the work was urgent and necessary, with no evidence of prejudice to tenants.

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

For the landlord.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone facing urgent repairs may be able to skip tenant consultations if they can show it's reasonable and won't harm tenants.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Quotes from contractors detailing the necessary work and urgency of the repairs.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, but permission must be sought within 28 days of receiving the written reasons for the decision.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.

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.