First-tier Tribunal Grants Landlord Dispensation for Urgent Water Works
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal granted dispensation to the landlord from the consultation requirements due to an urgent water mains leak. The decision ensures that no prejudice was caused to the tenants.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord may obtain dispensation from the consultation requirements if there is no prejudice to the tenants.
📖 What the law says
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, Section 20ZA allows a tribunal to grant dispensation from consultation requirements if it is reasonable to do so. The consultation requirements refer to obligations placed on landlords to consult tenants regarding certain works or long-term agreements.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal granted dispensation to the landlord from the consultation requirements due to an urgent water mains leak.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal granted dispensation to the landlord from the consultation requirements due to an urgent water mains leak, ensuring no prejudice to the tenants. Judge D Brandler presided over the case.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AY/LDC/2022/0148 HMCTS Code : P:PAPERREMOTE Property : 16-21 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant: [redacted] London Borough of Lambeth Representative : [COMPANY] (Gete Otite) Respondents : [redacted] Type of application : An application for dispensation from the consultation requirements of s.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal members : Judge D [NAME] determination : 28th November 2022
DECISION
2 Covid-19 pandemic: description of hearing This has been a remote hearing on the papers which has not been objected to by the parties. The form of remote hearing was P:PAPERREMOTE. A face-to- face hearing was not held because it was not practicable and no-one requested the same and all issues could be determined on paper. The documents that we were referred to are in an electronic bundle prepared by the Applicant containing 63 pages. References in this decision are to page numbers in square brackets. The order made is described at the end of these reasons. Decision
1. The Tribunal grants the Applicant retrospective dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements in respect of works carried out to remedy a burst water main servicing the flats at 16-21 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] ("The building").
Background to the Application
2. The Tribunal did not inspect the building as it considered the documentation and information before it in the appeal bundle enabled the Tribunal to proceed with this determination and also because of the restrictions and regulations arising out of the Covid-19 pandemic.
3. This has been a paper hearing which has not been objected to by the parties. The Tribunal had before it an electronic bundle prepared by the applicant in accordance with the Tribunal’s directions issued on 5th October 2022.
4. The Applicant landlord seeks retrospective dispensation under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the 1985 Act”) from the consultation requirements imposed on the landlord by section 20 of the 1985 Act in respect of remedial works required to remedy a water mains leak from pipes supplying the building. The report from Thames Water is undated. It states that over 50,000 litres of water would be wasted daily until remedial action is taken [19]. The letters dated 18/10/2021 from the Applicant to the leaseholders confirm what urgent works are required and provide an estimate of each leaseholder contribution in the sum of £734.73 [30].
5. Remedial works were carried out by the contractor under a qualifying long-term agreement. Due to the urgency of the works, significant daily waste of water and risk to the health and safety of the residents, works to repair the burst water main supply to the building were undertaken as an emergency.
3 6. The building is a low rise purpose built residential block containing six mixed tenure flats.
7. The leaseholders’ case 8. No objections to this application have been received by the Tribunal. The Applicant has confirmed by email dated 18/10/2022 that each of the leaseholders were served with a copy of the application by post and that they did display a copy of the application in a prominent place in the common parts of the building on 13/10/2022 [63].
9. By email dated 3/11/2022 the Applicant confirmed that no objections from leaseholders had been received.
Reasons for Decision
10. The only issue for the Tribunal to decide is whether or not it is reasonable to dispense with the statutory consultation requirements. This application does not concern the issue of whether or not service charges will be reasonable or payable.
11. Having read the evidence and submissions from the applicant and noted that there have been no objections to this application, the Tribunal determines the dispensation issues as follows.
12. Section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (as amended) 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 leaseholders in a specified form.
13. Should a landlord not comply with the correct consultation procedure, it is possible to obtain dispensation from compliance with these requirements by such an application as is this one before the Tribunal. Essentially the Tribunal must be satisfied that it is reasonable to do so.
14. The leading authority in relation to s.20ZA dispensation requests is [COMPANY] v Benson [2013] 1 WLR 854 (“Benson”) in which the Supreme Court set out guidance as to the approach to be taken by a tribunal when considering such applications. This was to focus on the extent, if any, to which the lessees were prejudiced in either paying for inappropriate works or paying more than would be appropriate, because of the failure of the landlord to comply with the consultation requirements. In his judgment, Lord [NAME] said as follows;
44. Given that the purpose of the Requirements is to ensure that the tenants are protected from (i) paying for inappropriate works or (ii) paying more than would be
4 appropriate, it seems to me that the issue on which the LVT 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.
45. Thus, in a case where it was common ground that the extent, quality and cost of the works were in no way affected by the landlord’s failure to comply with the Requirements, I find it hard to see why the dispensation should not be granted (at least in the absence of some very good reason): in such a case the tenants would be in precisely the position that the legislation intended them to be – ie as if the Requirements had been complied with.
15.
Accordingly, the Tribunal had to consider whether there was any prejudice that may have arisen out of the conduct of the Applicant and whether it was reasonable for the Tribunal to grant dispensation following the guidance set out above.
16. The Tribunal is of the view that, taking into account that no objection has been received from any of the leaseholders, it could not find prejudice to them by the granting of dispensation relating to remedial works to the water main leak, as set out in the application.
17. As stated above, the only issue for the Tribunal to decide is whether or not it is reasonable to dispense with the statutory consultation requirements. This application does not concern the issue of whether or not service charges will be reasonable or payable.
18. The Tribunal grants the Applicant retrospective dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements in respect of remedial works required to resolve the water mains leak affecting 16-21 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] ("The building").
19. The Tribunal makes the following condition of such dispensation:
(a) The Applicant shall be responsible for formally serving a copy of the Tribunal’s decision on all leaseholders of the flats.
Judge D Brandler 28th November 2022
5
APPENDIX 1 RIGHTS OF APPEAL
1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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, the property and the case number), state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party making the application is seeking.
6
APPENDIX 2 RELEVANT LEGISLATION
Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
20ZA. Consultation requirements: supplementary (1) Where an application is made to the appropriate 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.
Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003. Part 2 - consultation requirements for qualifying works for which public notice is not required Notice of intention 1. (1) The landlord shall give notice in writing of his intention to carry out qualifying works— (a) to each tenant; and (b) where a recognised tenants' association represents some or all of the tenants, to the association. (2) The notice shall— (a) describe, in general terms, the works proposed to be carried out or specify the place and hours at which a description of the proposed works may be inspected; (b) state the landlord’s reasons for considering it necessary to carry out the proposed works; (c) invite the making, in writing, of observations in relation to the proposed works; and (d) specify—
7 (i) the address to which such observations may be sent; (ii) that they must be delivered within the relevant period; and (iii) the date on which the relevant period ends. (3) The notice shall also invite each tenant and the association (if any) to propose, within the relevant period, the name of a person from whom the landlord should try to obtain an estimate for the carrying out of the proposed works.
Inspection of description of proposed works 2. (1) Where a notice under paragraph 1 specifies a place and hours for inspection— (a) the place and hours so specified must be reasonable; and (b) a description of the proposed works must be available for inspection, free of charge, at that place and during those hours. (2) If facilities to enable copies to be taken are not made available at the times at which the description may be inspected, the landlord shall provide to any tenant, on request and free of charge, a copy of the description. Duty to have regard to observations in relation to proposed works 3. Where, within the relevant period, observations are made, in relation to the proposed works by any tenant or recognised tenants' association, the landlord shall have regard to those observations.
Estimates and response to observations 4. (1) Where, within the relevant period, a nomination is made by a recognised tenants' association (whether or not a nomination is made by any tenant), the landlord shall try to obtain an estimate from the [NAME].
(2) Where, within the relevant period, a nomination is made by only one of the tenants (whether or not a nomination is made by a
8 recognised tenants' association), the landlord shall try to obtain an estimate from the [NAME].
(3) Where, within the relevant period, a single nomination is made by more than one tenant (whether or not a nomination is made by a recognised tenants' association), the landlord shall try to obtain an estimate— (a) from the person who received the most nominations; or (b) if there is no such person, but two (or more) persons received the same number of nominations, being a number in excess of the nominations received by any other person, from one of those two (or more) persons; or (c) in any other case, from any [NAME].
(4) Where, within the relevant period, more than one nomination is made by any tenant and more than one nomination is made by a recognised tenants' association, the landlord shall try to obtain an estimate— (a) from at least one person [NAME] by a tenant; and (b) from at least one person [NAME] by the association, other than a person from whom an estimate is sought as mentioned in paragraph (a). (5) The landlord shall, in accordance with this sub-paragraph and sub-paragraphs (6) to (9)— (a) obtain estimates for the carrying out of the proposed works; (b) supply, free of charge, a statement (“the paragraph (b) statement”) setting out— (i) as regards at least two of the estimates, the amount specified in the estimate as the estimated cost of the proposed works; and (ii) where the landlord has received observations to which (in accordance with paragraph 3) he is required to have regard, a summary of the observations and his response to them; and
9 (c) make all of the estimates available for inspection. (6) At least one of the estimates must be that of a person wholly unconnected with the landlord. (7) For the purpose of paragraph (6), it shall be assumed that there is a connection between a person and the landlord— (a) where the landlord is a company, if the person is, or is to be, a director or manager of the company or is a close relative of any such director or manager; (b) where the landlord is a company, and the person is a partner in a [NAME], if any partner in that [NAME] is, or is to be, a director or manager of the company or is a close relative of any such director or manager; (c) where both the landlord and the person are companies, if any director or manager of one company is, or is to be, a director or manager of the other company; (d) where the person is a company, if the landlord is a director or manager of the company or is a close relative of any such director or manager; or (e) where the person is a company and the landlord is a partner in a [NAME], if any partner in that [NAME] is a director or manager of the company or is a close relative of any such director or manager. (8) Where the landlord has obtained an estimate from a [NAME], that estimate must be one of those to which the paragraph (b) statement relates. (9) The paragraph (b) statement shall be supplied to, and the estimates made available for inspection by— (a) each tenant; and (b) the secretary of the recognised tenants' association (if any). (10) The landlord shall, by notice in writing to each tenant and the association (if any)—
10 (a) specify the place and hours at which the estimates may be inspected; (b) invite the making, in writing, of observations in relation to those estimates; (c) specify— (i) the address to which such observations may be sent; (ii) that they must be delivered within the relevant period; and (iii) the date on which the relevant period ends.
(11) Paragraph 2 shall apply to estimates made available for inspection under this paragraph as it applies to a description of proposed works made available for inspection under that paragraph.
Duty to have regard to observations in relation to estimates 5. Where, within the relevant period, observations are made in relation to the estimates by a recognised tenants' association or, as the case may be, any tenant, the landlord shall have regard to those observations. Duty on entering into contract 6. (1) Subject to sub-paragraph (2), where the landlord enters into a contract for the carrying out of qualifying works, he shall, within 21 days of entering into the contract, by notice in writing to each tenant and the recognised tenants' association (if any)— (a) state his reasons for awarding the contract or specify the place and hours at which a statement of those reasons may be inspected; and (b) there he received observations to which (in accordance with paragraph 5) he was required to have regard, summarise the observations and set out his response to them.
11
(2) The requirements of sub-paragraph (1) do not apply where the person with whom the contract is made is a [NAME] or submitted the lowest estimate.
(3) Paragraph 2 shall apply to a statement made available for inspection under this paragraph as it applies to a description of proposed works made available for inspection under that paragraph.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 11 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Structural Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Landlord Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Remedy Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Remedial Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Landlord Dispensation for Boiler Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Landlord Dispensation for Urgent Hot Water Repai…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Window Replacement
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Landlord Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Building Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Remedial Works
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 provides clear evidence that the works are reasonable and do not cause prejudice to tenants.
- The landlord demonstrates that the works are urgent and necessary for health and safety reasons.
- The landlord shows that dispensation from consultation requirements does not result in any prejudice to leaseholders.
- The landlord obtains dispensation retrospectively if it can be shown that no prejudice arose from skipping consultations.
- The landlord proves that the works are reasonable and safe, thus justifying dispensation from consultation requirements.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- (No applicable factors listed in provided cases)
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal granted dispensation to the landlord from the consultation requirements due to an urgent water mains leak.
Who was involved?
The landlord and the leaseholders of the building were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant dispensation because there was no evidence of prejudice to the tenants and the works were urgent.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 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 urgent and there was no prejudice to the tenants.
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 if their works are urgent and there is no prejudice to the tenants.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence such as the report from Thames Water and letters from the landlord to the leaseholders mattered.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) within 28 days.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to get advice from a qualified solicitor for a case like this.
