VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Works

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal granted a landlord permission to bypass the usual consultation process for major works because the works were deemed urgent and necessary to prevent further damage and distress to the tenants. This decision was made by Judge Carr on 2nd March 2020.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord is entitled to dispense with the statutory consultation procedure where the works are necessary and urgent.

Topics

statutory consultation procedureurgent works

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

This section allows a tribunal to grant permission to skip the consultation process required before making certain changes to a property if the tribunal finds it reasonable to do so.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal granted dispensation from the statutory consultation procedure due to the urgent nature of the works.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal granted dispensation from the statutory consultation procedure for a landlord due to the urgent nature of the works, which were necessary to prevent further damage and distress to the tenants. Judge Carr ruled on the matter on 2nd March 2020.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AX/LDC/2020/0019 Property : Hanover House and [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : Ms [COUNSEL].[COUNSEL] Respondent : [redacted] Representative : N/A Type of [NAME] : To dispense with the requirement to consult lessees about major works Tribunal member : Judge Carr Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 2nd March 2020

DECISION

2 Decision of the tribunal 1. The Tribunal determines to exercise its discretion to dispense with the consultation requirements contained in Part 2 of Schedule 4 to the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003. The [NAME] 2. [ADDRESS] (Tolworth) [COMPANY] applied to the Tribunal on 15th January 2020 under s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for dispensation from the statutory consultation procedure. Procedure 3. The Tribunal held a case management review of this matter on 27th January 2020 and issued directions on the same date. In those directions it was decided that in view of the nature of the [NAME] the matter should be determined on the basis of written representations and without an oral hearing.

4. The Directions gave an opportunity for any party to request an oral hearing. They also gave an opportunity for the Respondents if they wished to oppose the [NAME] from the landlord to provide a statement to the Tribunal setting out reasons for so doing. No Respondent has requested an oral hearing, nor has any Respondent objected to the [NAME] and therefore the matter is being determined on the basis of the documents provided. Determination The Evidence 5. The evidence before the Tribunal indicates as follows: (i) On 16th November 2018 the [NAME] reported a leak into her property. Property Matters are instructed to investigate the source of the leak and recommend works. (ii) On 10th December 2018 a report is received by the property manager from Property Matters with photographs and a quote for works. (iii) On 6th January 2019 the [NAME] contacts the property manager to advise that the leak is worsening and on 22nd January 2019 approval to proceed with

3 the work is received from the Directors. Property Matters are instructed to proceed with the repair urgently. (iv) On 24th January 2019 the [NAME] advised the property manager of a leak into their property and reported mould on the ceiling which is believed to have been caused by the same leak from the roof. (v) Property Matters carried out various works over the following nine months but leaks continued to occur and there were a series of delays. (vi) The Directors then decided to instruct another company, Tunbridge Wells Roofing to carry out the necessary works. On 20th November 2019 quotes were received from Tunbridge Wells Roofing and on 11th December 2019 it was instructed to carry out the works. (vii) Consultation was not commenced at the time of the first complaint because it was not anticipated that it would be necessary. It was only after the quotations were received from Tunbridge Wells Roofing that the extent of the works became clear. (viii) The works commenced on 6th January 2020. The delay was due to torrential rain and high winds which posed health and safety risks. (ix) The problems needed to be remedied urgently and therefore the statutory consultation was not carried out. Distress and inconvenience was being caused to the [NAME] and further damage had to prevented from occurring to the roof, [NAME] 5 and potentially other flats. (x) Further delay would have increased the expense and inconvenience. (xi) Dispensation is required due to the urgent nature of the works. (xii) The applicant confirmed that the directions in connection with service of documents have been complied with.

4 The Law (i) The Tribunal is being asked to exercise its discretion under s.20ZA of the Act. The wording of s/20ZA is significant. Subs (1) provides ‘Where an [NAME] is made to a leasehold valuation tribunal for a determination to dispense with all or any of the consultation requirements in relation to any qualifying works or qualifying long term agreements, the tribunal may make the determination if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements’ (emphasis added

The tribunal’s decision 6. The tribunal determines to grant the [NAME]. Reasons for the tribunal’s decision 7. The tribunal considers that the works are necessary and urgent.

8. The parties should note that this determination does not concern the issue of whether any service charge costs will be reasonable or indeed payable. The Respondents are able, if it appears to them to be appropriate, to make an [NAME] under s.27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 as to reasonableness and payability.

Name: Judge Carr Date: 2nd March 2020

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 regional office which has been dealing with the case.

5 The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office 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).

6 Appendix of relevant legislation

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (as amended) Section 18 (1) In the following provisions of this Act "service charge" means an amount payable by a tenant of a dwelling as part of or in addition to the rent - (a) which is payable, directly or indirectly, for services, repairs, maintenance, improvements or insurance or the landlord's costs of management, and (b) the whole or part of which varies or may vary according to the relevant costs. (2) The relevant costs are the costs or estimated costs incurred or to be incurred by or on behalf of the landlord, or a superior landlord, in connection with the matters for which the service charge is payable. (3) For this purpose - (a) "costs" includes overheads, and (b) costs are relevant costs in relation to a service charge whether they are incurred, or to be incurred, in the period for which the service charge is payable or in an earlier or later period. Section 19 (1) Relevant costs shall be taken into account in determining the amount of a service charge payable for a period - (a) only to the extent that they are reasonably incurred, and (b) where they are incurred on the provisions of services or the carrying out of works, only if the services or works are of a reasonable standard; and the amount payable shall be limited accordingly. (2) Where a service charge is payable before the relevant costs are incurred, no greater amount than is reasonable is so payable, and after the relevant costs have been incurred any necessary adjustment shall be made by repayment, reduction or subsequent charges or otherwise. Section 27A (1) An [NAME] may be made to the appropriate tribunal for a determination whether a service charge is payable and, if it is, as to - (a) the person by whom it is payable, (b) the person to whom it is payable, (c) the amount which is payable,

7 (d) the date at or by which it is payable, and (e) the manner in which it is payable. (2) Subsection (1) applies whether or not any payment has been made. (3) An [NAME] may also be made to the appropriate tribunal for a determination whether, if costs were incurred for services, repairs, maintenance, improvements, insurance or management of any specified description, a service charge would be payable for the costs and, if it would, as to - (a) the person by whom it would be payable, (b) the person to whom it would be payable, (c) the amount which would be payable, (d) the date at or by which it would be payable, and (e) the manner in which it would be payable. (4) No [NAME] under subsection (1) or (3) may be made in respect of a matter which - (a) has been agreed or admitted by the tenant, (b) has been, or is to be, referred to arbitration pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement to which the tenant is a party, (c) has been the subject of determination by a court, or (d) has been the subject of determination by an arbitral tribunal pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement. (5) But the tenant is not to be taken to have agreed or admitted any matter by reason only of having made any payment. Section 20 (1) Where this section applies to any qualifying works or qualifying long term agreement, the relevant contributions of tenants are limited in accordance with subsection (6) or (7) (or both) unless the consultation requirements have been either— (a) complied with in relation to the works or agreement, or (b) dispensed with in relation to the works or agreement by (or on appeal from) the appropriate tribunal . (2) In this section “relevant contribution”, in relation to a tenant and any works or agreement, is the amount which he may be required under the terms of his lease to contribute (by the payment of service charges) to relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works or under the agreement. (3) This section applies to qualifying works if relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works exceed an appropriate amount. (4) The Secretary of State may by regulations provide that this section applies to a qualifying long term agreement—

8 (a) if relevant costs incurred under the agreement exceed an appropriate amount, or (b) if relevant costs incurred under the agreement during a period prescribed by the regulations exceed an appropriate amount. (5) An appropriate amount is an amount set by regulations made by the Secretary of State; and the regulations may make provision for either or both of the following to be an appropriate amount— (a) an amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations, and (b) an amount which results in the relevant contribution of any one or more tenants being an amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations. (6) Where an appropriate amount is set by virtue of paragraph (a) of subsection (5), the amount of the relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works or under the agreement which may be taken into account in determining the relevant contributions of tenants is limited to the appropriate amount. (7) Where an appropriate amount is set by virtue of paragraph (b) of that subsection, the amount of the relevant contribution of the tenant, or each of the tenants, whose relevant contribution would otherwise exceed the amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations is limited to the amount so prescribed or determined.] Section 20B (1) If any of the relevant costs taken into account in determining the amount of any service charge were incurred more than 18 months before a demand for payment of the service charge is served on the tenant, then (subject to subsection (2)), the tenant shall not be liable to pay so much of the service charge as reflects the costs so incurred. (2) Subsection (1) shall not apply if, within the period of 18 months beginning with the date when the relevant costs in question were incurred, the tenant was notified in writing that those costs had been incurred and that he would subsequently be required under the terms of his lease to contribute to them by the payment of a service charge. Section 20C (1) A tenant may make an [NAME] for an order that all or any of the costs incurred, or to be incurred, by the landlord in connection with proceedings before a court, residential property tribunal or the Upper Tribunal, or in connection with arbitration proceedings, are

9 not to be regarded as relevant costs to be taken into account in determining the amount of any service charge payable by the tenant or any other person or persons specified in the [NAME]. (2) The [NAME] shall be made— (a) in the case of court proceedings, to the court before which the proceedings are taking place or, if the [NAME] is made after the proceedings are concluded, to a county court; (aa) in the case of proceedings before a residential property tribunal, to that tribunal; (b) in the case of proceedings before a residential property tribunal, to the tribunal before which the proceedings are taking place or, if the [NAME] is made after the proceedings are concluded, to any residential property tribunal; (c) in the case of proceedings before the Upper Tribunal, to the tribunal; (d) in the case of arbitration proceedings, to the arbitral tribunal or, if the [NAME] is made after the proceedings are concluded, to a county court. (3) The court or tribunal to which the [NAME] is made may make such order on the [NAME] as it considers just and equitable in the circumstances. Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 Schedule 11, paragraph 1 (1) In this Part of this Schedule “administration charge” means an amount payable by a tenant of a dwelling as part of or in addition to the rent which is payable, directly or indirectly— (a) for or in connection with the grant of approvals under his lease, or applications for such approvals, (b) for or in connection with the provision of information or documents by or on behalf of the landlord or a person who is party to his lease otherwise than as landlord or tenant, (c) in respect of a failure by the tenant to make a payment by the due date to the landlord or a person who is party to his lease otherwise than as landlord or tenant, or (d) in connection with a breach (or alleged breach) of a covenant or condition in his lease. (2) But an amount payable by the tenant of a dwelling the rent of which is registered under Part 4 of the Rent Act 1977 (c. 42) is not an administration charge, unless the amount registered is entered as a variable amount in pursuance of section 71(4) of that Act.

10 (3) In this Part of this Schedule “variable administration charge” means an administration charge payable by a tenant which is neither— (a) specified in his lease, nor (b) calculated in accordance with a formula specified in his lease. (4) An order amending sub-paragraph (1) may be made by the appropriate national authority. Schedule 11, paragraph 2 A variable administration charge is payable only to the extent that the amount of the charge is reasonable. Schedule 11, paragraph 5 (1) An [NAME] may be made to the appropriate tribunal for a determination whether an administration charge is payable and, if it is, as to— (a) the person by whom it is payable, (b) the person to whom it is payable, (c) the amount which is payable, (d) the date at or by which it is payable, and (e) the manner in which it is payable. (2) Sub-paragraph (1) applies whether or not any payment has been made. (3) The jurisdiction conferred on the appropriate tribunal in respect of any matter by virtue of sub-paragraph (1) is in addition to any jurisdiction of a court in respect of the matter. (4) No [NAME] under sub-paragraph (1) may be made in respect of a matter which— (a) has been agreed or admitted by the tenant, (b) has been, or is to be, referred to arbitration pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement to which the tenant is a party, (c) has been the subject of determination by a court, or (d) has been the subject of determination by an arbitral tribunal pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement. (5) But the tenant is not to be taken to have agreed or admitted any matter by reason only of having made any payment. (6) An agreement by the tenant of a dwelling (other than a post-dispute arbitration agreement) is void in so far as it purports to provide for a determination— (a) in a particular manner, or

11 (b) on particular evidence, of any question which may be the subject matter of an [NAME] under sub-paragraph (1).

📊 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 works are necessary and urgent.
  • No prejudice is suffered by the leaseholders.
  • The works are necessary for health and safety reasons.
  • The works are urgent and cost-effective.
  • There is no relevant prejudice to leaseholders.

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 to bypass the statutory consultation procedure for major works due to their urgent nature.

Who was involved?

The landlord and the leaseholders of the property were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to grant dispensation because the works were necessary and urgent, preventing further damage and distress to the tenants.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA and the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003 were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was that the works were necessary and urgent, thus justifying the bypass of the statutory consultation procedure.

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

The decision was for the person who brought the case, the landlord.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation may also seek dispensation from the statutory consultation procedure if their works are urgent and necessary.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence of the urgency and necessity of the works, including reports of ongoing leaks and damage, was crucial.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal within 28 days of receiving the written reasons for the decision.

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

It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving statutory consultation procedures.

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.