First-tier Tribunal Grants Landlord Dispensation for Urgent Works
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal granted a landlord permission to bypass certain consultation requirements because the work needed to replace boilers and waterproof the boiler room was deemed urgent and necessary to maintain safety and prevent future water damage.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord may be dispensed from consultation requirements if the works are urgent and necessary to maintain safety and prevent future damage.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent works to maintain safety and prevent future damage.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal granted a landlord dispensation from consultation requirements under s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for urgent works to replace boilers and waterproof the boiler room to maintain safety and prevent future water damage.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2022
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00BK/LDC/2021/0284 P:REMOTE Property : [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] :
[APPELLANT]
Respondents : [redacted] the Application
Representative : Not represented Type of Application : [POSTCODE] Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal Member : Judge [NAME] MA LLM
Date of paper consideration : 10 January 2022
Date of Decision : 10 January 2022
2
DECISION
REASONS
1. By an application made to the Tribunal on 29 October 2021 the Applicant seeks a determination of its application for dispensation from the consultation requirements imposed by s. 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
2. Directions were issued by the Tribunal on 12 November 2021.
3. This matter was determined by a paper consideration P:REMOTE on 10 January 2022 at which the Tribunal considered the Applicant’s application and accompanying documents.
4. The Directions issued by the Tribunal had been sent by the Applicant to all Respondents asking them to respond and to indicate whether or not they opposed the application. No objections were received by the Tribunal.
5. The Applicant applied for dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements in order to undertake urgent work to the property to replace boilers to re-establish provision of heating and hot water to the building and to tank the boiler room to prevent future water damage. The cost of boilers replacement will be covered by the [NAME], the current application relates to the additional work of tanking and waterproofing the boilers’ vault which is necessary to prevent similar damage happening in the future after heavy rain. The works could not have been anticipated before occurrence of recent heavy water ingress. The works have already commenced.
The Tribunal determines that it will exercise its discretion to dispense with the consultation requirements imposed by s.20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 on the grounds that the works proposed by the Applicant are required urgently to maintain the safety of the building for its residents. No objections were received to the application.
3 6. A first notice under the s20 consultation procedure was served on all leaseholders on 29 October 2021 but , as stated above, no objections to the application have been received from the Respondents.
7. The Applicant seeks dispensation from all consultation requirements as it would not be practical or possible to comply properly with the consultation requirements given the urgency of the works .
8. The supplied estimate from [NAME] for the proposed works quotes a price of £6,400 excluding VAT and the application states that the works are qualifying works, which are works that, without a dispensation from the Tribunal, would require the Applicant to follow the consultation requirements set out in section 20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003. The costs will be met from the [NAME]. A second estimate form another supplier was rejected by the Applicant on the grounds of its excessive costs.
9. The application is said to be urgent in order to ensure provision of heating and hot water to the building during the winter months especially as some of the older residents in the block rely on constant central heating during this time. The replacement cost of the boilers which are also being replaced will be covered by the [NAME], but the Applicant has been advised that the improvement of the boilers’ vault is necessary to prevent similar damage happening in the future after heavy rain.
10. No objections or comments have been received from the Respondents.
11. The Applicant therefore requests the Tribunal to grant a dispensation from compliance with the full requirements of the section in order to allow the sum incurred to be recovered through the service charge.
12. The Tribunal was not asked to inspect the property and in the context of the issues before it and the current Coronavirus guidance did not consider that an inspection of the property would be either necessary or proportionate.
13. 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 application 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 agreement, the tribunal may make the determination if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements” (emphasis added).
14. The Tribunal understands that the purposes of the consultation requirements is to ensure that leaseholders are given the fullest
4 possible opportunity to make observations about expenditure of money for which they will in part be liable.
15. Having considered the submissions made by the Applicant the Tribunal is satisfied that the works carried out are necessary and urgent and that no undue prejudice will be caused to or suffered by any tenant by the grant of dispensation under s20ZA.
16. This determination does not affect the tenants’ rights to apply to the Tribunal challenging the payability or reasonableness of the service charges.
Judge [NAME] as Chairman Date 10 January 2022
Note: Appeals
RIGHTS OF APPEAL 1. A person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) must seek permission to do so by making written application by email to [EMAIL].
2. The application must arrive at the Tribunal within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision.
3. If the person wishing to appeal does not comply with the 28 day time limit, the person shall include with the application for permission to appeal a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28 day time limit; the Tribunal will then decide whether to extend time or not to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed.
4. The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party making the application is seeking.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Landlord Dispensation for Urgent Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Assured Periodic Tenanc…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Reasonable Service Charges for Tenant
- 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 Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Repairs Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Emergency Roof Repairs Approved Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Repair Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Repairs to Prevent Water Ingress
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Repairs Dispensation Without Hearing
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 were urgently needed to restore heating and hot water to the building, especially for older residents during winter.
- The works were necessary to prevent future water damage after heavy rain.
- The Tribunal was satisfied that the works were necessary and urgent.
- No objections were received from the leaseholders regarding the application for dispensation.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The decision allowed the landlord to bypass the consultation requirements for urgent works to replace boilers and waterproof the boiler room.
Who was involved?
The landlord applied for dispensation from consultation requirements, while the tenants were not represented and did not object.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant the dispensation because the works were urgent and necessary to maintain safety and prevent future water damage.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20 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 necessary to maintain safety and prevent future water damage.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the landlord who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation might also be able to bypass consultation requirements if their works are urgent and necessary to maintain safety and prevent future damage.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence such as estimates for the works and the necessity of the works due to recent water damage were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) if permission is granted.
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.
