First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to perform urgent roof repairs without consulting the a person, stating that the repairs were necessary to prevent water damage to the property.
⚖️ Legal holding
It is reasonable to dispense with consultation requirements under the relevant statute when urgent works are necessary to prevent water ingress.
📖 What the law says
This section allows a tribunal to grant permission to a landlord to bypass consultation requirements if the tribunal finds it reasonable to do so, particularly when dealing with urgent works or agreements.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal granted dispensation to skip consultation requirements due to urgent roof repairs.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal granted dispensation to the landlord to carry out urgent roof repairs without consulting the leaseholders, citing the urgency of preventing water ingress into the property.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2022
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00BE/LDC/2024/0084 Applicant : [redacted] Representative : [RESPONDENT]: JP Respondent : [redacted] K [NAME] : 64 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Tribunal : Judge Adrian Jack, Tribunal Member [NAME] of decision : 8th July 2024
DECISION
Background to the application A. The Applicant-landlord has applied for dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements in respect of urgent works to repair the roof to prevent water ingress into the property. B. The Applicant states that the [NAME] were made aware of the works to be carried out. The application is said to be urgent because of health and safety issue. C. 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. D. The tenants have not responded to the application, nor have they indicated any opposition to it. The Tribunal has nonetheless to exercise its own discretion in deciding whether to grant a dispensation or not.
2 Reasons 1. This is a matter which has urgency. The block contains 4 flats. [NAME] of the management company explains that they were made aware of a roof leak on 9th February 2024. They obtained a quote from [NAME] for £1,250, which was forwarded to the [NAME] on 16th February 2024. The [NAME] were told that due to the urgency no consultation under section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 would be carried out. No objections were made to instructing [NAME] or to the carrying out of the works without compliance with section 20. The works were completed by 29th February 2024.
2. Section 20ZA(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 provides: “Where an application is made to the appropriate tribunal [in this case, this Tribunal] 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. In our judgment it is reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements. Consultation would take several months, whereas the water ingress needed to be dealt with without delay.
DECISION 1. The Tribunal grants dispensation pursuant to section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 in respect of the works, the subject of the application. 2. No order for costs.
Name: [NAME]: 8th July 2024
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Roof Repairs Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Urgent Roof Repairs Dispensation Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Emergency Repairs Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Guttering Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Permission for Urgent Repairs Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Emergency Works Exemption for Damaged Brickwork
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Freeholder Granted Permission for Urgent Repairs Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Urgent Roof Repairs Dispensation Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Repair Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rules Unreasonable Administration Charges Unenforceable
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 urgent and necessary to prevent further damage.
- There is no relevant prejudice to tenants.
- Tenants were notified and given an opportunity to object.
- The works are essential and urgent.
- Emergency works to make safe damaged brickwork can be exempted from statutory consultation requirements.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal decided to grant dispensation to the landlord to carry out urgent roof repairs without consulting the leaseholders.
Who was involved?
The landlord requested permission to carry out urgent repairs, while the leaseholders were not consulted.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant the dispensation because the repairs were urgent and necessary to prevent water damage.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, specifically section 20ZA, was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The urgency of the repairs and the need to prevent water damage was the most important argument.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was in favour of the landlord.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may also be able to obtain dispensation for urgent repairs if they can demonstrate the necessity and urgency.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence of the urgency of the repairs and the potential for water damage was presented.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Decisions from the First-tier Tribunal can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.