First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Tenancy Works
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to skip some consultation steps for urgent and cost-effective repairs at a residential building. The tribunal decided that the works were necessary for safety and cost savings, and that the a person had been informed properly.
⚖️ Legal holding
An applicant may obtain dispensation from consultation requirements under s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 if the works are urgent and cost-effective.
📖 What the law says
Under this section, an appropriate tribunal can grant dispensation from consultation requirements related to qualifying works or agreements if it finds it reasonable to do so. Qualifying works refer to works on a building or premises, and the consultation requirements are detailed rules set by the Secretary of State through regulations.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent and cost-effective additional works.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements under s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for urgent and cost-effective additional works at a residential property. The tribunal found that the leaseholders had been properly notified and given an opportunity to respond, but had not done so.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00BK/LDC/2024/0237 Property : [NAME], [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [APPELLANT] Respondent : [redacted] per the schedule attached to the application) Representative : N/A Type of application : Application for dispensation from consultation – s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal member : Judge Tagliavini Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 13 November 2024
DECISION
2
The tribunal’s decision
1. The tribunal grants the applicant the dispensation from the consultation requirements of s.20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, in respect of the structural repairs and rebuilding of 3No. chimneys, additional masonry repairs, additional timber repairs and the re-setting of corroded window railings that have been carried out at a cost of £16,195 plus VAT.
The application
2. This is application by the [NAME] of the subject property situate at [NAME], [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] (‘[NAME]’) seeking dispensation from part of the consultation requirements of s.20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
Background
3. [NAME] comprises a residential period mansion block of 14 flats. During the course of major works it was discovered that additional works were required to the in respect of the structural repairs and rebuilding of 3 No. chimneys, additional masonry repairs, additional timber repairs and the re-setting of corroded window railings (‘the Additional Works’). The applicant considered that these Additional Works were urgent and that it would be most cost effective to carry them out while scaffolding from the current and ongoing major works was still in situ.
4. A Notice of Intention dated 17 June 2024 was sent informing the respondent [NAME] of the applicant’s intention to carry out these Addition Works. No response to this Notice was received by the applicant from any of the [NAME].
5. Pursuant to the tribunal’s directions dated 26 September 2024, the applicant sent a copy of this application and the tribunal’s directions to each of the [NAME] and displayed a copy of this application and the directions in the common parts of [NAME]. This was confirmed by the applicant in its correspondence with the tribunal and by way of photographs included in the hearing bundle.
6. Further, no response was received by the applicant or by the tribunal from any [NAME], either objecting to or supporting this application.
The hearing
7. As neither party requested an oral hearing, the tribunal determined this application on the documents provided by the applicant. These comprised of two hearings bundles (Part I and Part II) each comprising 32 electronic pages).
3
The tribunal’s reasons
8. The tribunal finds the applicant has notified the [NAME] of this application and that they have been given a proper opportunity to respond and have declined to do so. The tribunal finds that the Additional Works were urgently required in order to ensure the [NAME] safety and the integrity of the structure of [NAME]. The tribunal also finds that it was most cost effective and therefore beneficial to the [NAME], to carry out these Additional Works while major works were still ongoing.
9. Consequently, in the absence of any [NAME] identifying any prejudice caused by the applicant’s failure to comply with all of the s.20 consultation requirements, the tribunal considers its is reasonable and appropriate to grant the dispensation sought; [COMPANY] v Benson and others [2013] UKSC 14 & [2013] UKSC 54.
Name: Judge Tagliavini
Date: 13 November 2024
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 should be made on Form RP PTA available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-rp-pta-application-for- permission-to-appeal-a-decision-to-the-upper-tribunal-lands-chamber 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.
4 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).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Appoints Manager for Property with Maintenance Issues
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) RTM Company Granted Dispensation for Urgent Electrical Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Fire Alarm Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Sump Pump Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs Under s.20ZA
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Replacement Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Upgrading Call System
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Landlord Permission for Urgent Drainage Work Due…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Fire Safety Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Boiler Installation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Environmental Work
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Repairs Dispensation Without Conditions
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.
- The works are cost-effective.
- The works are necessary for safety reasons.
- There is no substantial prejudice to the respondents.
- It is reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent and cost-effective additional works.
Who was involved?
The landlord of a residential property and the leaseholders of the property.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the landlord could skip some consultation steps because the works were urgent and cost-effective.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1s.20ZA was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that the works were urgent and cost-effective mattered most.
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 might be able to get dispensation from consultation requirements if their works are urgent and cost-effective.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence showing that the works were urgent and cost-effective 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 always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases like this.
