First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Works
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal granted permission for a landlord to carry out urgent repairs to fix water damage, but excluded non-essential work like redecoration. The decision was made by Judge Shepherd.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord may obtain dispensation for urgent works under s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 without consulting tenants if the works are necessary to address immediate safety or structural issues.
📖 What the law says
This section outlines the conditions under which a landlord can apply to a tribunal for permission to bypass consultation requirements related to certain works or long-term agreements. The tribunal may grant this permission if it deems it reasonable to do so. It defines 'qualifying works' as works on a building or premises and 'qualifying long-term agreement' as an agreement lasting more than twelve months. The section also specifies that the Secretary of State can create regulations detailing what constitutes 'consultation requirements.' These regulations can require landlords to provide tenants with details of proposed works, obtain estimates, consider tenant suggestions, and provide reasons for certain actions.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal granted dispensation for urgent works under s.20ZA but excluded non-urgent works.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal granted dispensation for urgent works under s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, excluding non-urgent works such as decoration. Judge Shepherd presided over the case at the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber).
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00BG/LDC/2023/0144 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicants : [redacted] : [COUNSEL] Respondent: [redacted] : In person Type of [NAME] : For dispensation under Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, s.20ZA Tribunal members :
Judge Shepherd Oliver Dowty MRICS
Date of determination and venue : at 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 10th November 2023
DECISION
1. This was a disputed [NAME] for dispensation under s,20ZA Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The dispensation [NAME] relates to works to rectify water ingress to the building at 644-648 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]. The Respondents under their leases are required to contribute to any works carried out to 644-[ADDRESS]. It became clear that
2 the leaks predominantly affect [ADDRESS] but have also affected Flat C in [ADDRESS]. It also became clear that the works proposed went beyond the emergency works required to rectify the water ingress problem and included for example decoration of the rear elevation. The Respondents were being asked to contribute around £28000 for their share of these expanded works.
2. The Tribunal gave an indication that it may only give dispensation for the urgent works. The parties took some time to negotiate what urgent works should be included in the dispensation. These were agreed to be the following:
• Scaffolding at the rear of the building excluding g the flank wall. • Roof works • Works to the stacks and projecting walls • Drains
3. These are the works for which dispensation is granted under s.20ZA. Any further works will need to be consulted upon pursuant to s.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
4. The Tribunal is grateful for the cooperative approach adopted by the parties and trusts that relations are improved as a result of this process. Name: Judge Shepherd Date: 10th November 2023
3 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 [NAME] for permission must be made to the First- tier Tribunal at the [NAME] which has been dealing with the case. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the [NAME] within 28 days after the tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the [NAME]. If the [NAME] is not made within the 28 day time limit, such [NAME] 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 [NAME] for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The [NAME] 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 [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking. If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further [NAME] for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 10 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) RTM Company Granted Dispensation for Urgent Electrical Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rejects Invalid Rent Increase Notice
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Urgent Lift Repairs Dispensation in First-tier Tribunal Ca…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Reduces Financial Penalty to £500
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Fire Safety Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Works on Residential Estate
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 necessary to address immediate safety or structural issues.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The request for dispensation does not meet the criteria for urgency or necessity.
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 for urgent works under s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1. However, it excluded non-urgent works.
Who was involved?
The landlord and tenants were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant dispensation for urgent works because they were necessary to address immediate safety issues. Non-urgent works were excluded.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, specifically sections 20ZA and 20, were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the urgent works were necessary to address immediate safety issues.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the landlord.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation might be able to get dispensation for urgent works if they can show that the works are necessary to address immediate safety issues.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence showing the urgency and necessity of the works likely 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.