First-tier Tribunal Grants Lift Repairs Dispensation Without Consultation

OUTCOME: Allowed

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00BG/LDC/2024/0220 Property : [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [COUNSEL], [COMPANY] Respondents : [redacted] [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] [NAME] : [COMPANY] : N/A Type of [NAME] : To dispense with the statutory consultation requirements under section 20ZA Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal member : Judge Sarah McKeown Date of decision : 20 May 2024

DECISION

This has been a remote hearing on the papers. A face-to-face hearing was not held because no-one requested a hearing and all issues could be determined on paper. The documents to which the Tribunal was referred are in two electronic bundle of 79 pages, the contents of which the Tribunal has noted. The decision made is as set out below.

DECISION The Tribunal grants the [NAME] for retrospective dispensation from statutory consultation in respect of works to rectify defects with the single lift installation in the sum of £5,091.34 plus VAT. This decision does not affect the Tribunal’s jurisdiction upon any future [NAME] to make a determination under section 27A of the Act in respect of the reasonableness and/or cost of the qualifying long-term agreement. The Applicant must serve a copy of this decision on all Respondents, and [NAME] and display a copy of this decision in a prominent place in the common parts of the Property within 14 days of receipt of this decision.

The [NAME] – p.2 References are to page numbers in the bundle provided for the hearing.

1. [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] (“the Property”) is a block of purpose-built flats. It has six floors, some with balconies, with basement, bike and bin store. It has fob access and the entrance hall and stairwell are communal. It comprises 23 residential flats and has a commercial unit (hence [NAME]) on the ground floor.

2. The Applicant is [COMPANY].

3. The Applicant seeks a determination pursuant to section 20ZA of the Landlord and tenant Act 1985 (“the Act”) for retrospective dispensation from consultation in respect of works to repair a lift.

4. The Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) Regulations 2003 provide that consultation requirements are triggered if the landlord plans to carry out qualifying works or enter into a qualifying long-term agreement which would result in the contribution of any tenant being more than £250. The cost which is the subject of the [NAME] exceeds this threshold.

5. By directions dated 12 September 2024 (‘the directions”) the Tribunal directed that the Applicant had, by 28 September 2024, send to each of the leaseholders (and any residential sublessees), to any [COMPANY] and to [NAME], by email, hand delivery or first-class post, among other things, copies of the [NAME] form (unless already sent), brief statement to explain the reasons for the [NAME] (unless already detailed in the [NAME] form), copies of any reports, estimate and a copy of the directions.

6. Leaseholders who opposed to the [NAME] were to respond by 8 October 2024. There was also provision for a response from the Applicant.

7. By further directions dated 6 January 2025 (p.12) it was noted that the Tribunal had received an email from [NAME] of [COMPANY] stating that he had not received the earlier directions and so an extension of time was given for compliance.

8. The Tribunal has not received a completed form from any [NAME] or sublessee.

9. The directions provided that the Tribunal would decide the matter on the basis of written submissions unless any party requested a hearing. No such request has been made.

The Applicant’s case

10. It is said that the lift was broken and not working. The diagnosis was that the main drive unit needed to be replaced. The estimates were £5,091.34 plus VAT (p.23). The residents were unable to get to their properties via the lift. The applicant states that the Applicant had provided notice to owners that the works needed to be carried out, and that they were urgent. It was said that they were applying with dispensation due to the fact that the “normal” s.20 route could take up to three months. It is said that [NAME] would be appointed to complete the repairs to the main drive unit and ensure that the lift was working. There were 24 units that were unable to use the lift.

11. A copy of the lease for Apartment 22 has been provided (it is between [COMPANY] and [NAME] and it dated 10 December 2010) – p.30.

12. It specifies that the Lessee’s Proportion is 5.01% in relation to the costs attributable to the whole of the building. The Service Charge is defined in the Seventh Schedule.

13. [NAME] is a commercial [NAME] and was initially named as a Respondent. It was noted in the directions dated 12 September 2024 that there was no obligation under the 1985 Act to consult them about the proposed works: that obligation only benefited residential leaseholders and so Sainsbury’s were made an [NAME] to they were aware of the [NAME] and the matters it contained.

The Respondent’s case

14. No Respondent objected to the [NAME].

The Law 15. Section 20ZA of the Act, subsection (1) provides: “Where an [NAME] is made to a 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”.

16. The Supreme Court in the case of [COMPANY] v [NAME] and [NAME] [2013] UKSC 14 set out certain principles relevant to section 20ZA. Lord [NAME], having clarified that the purpose of section 19 to 20ZA of the Act was to ensure that tenants are protected from paying for inappropriate works and paying more than would be appropriate, went on to state “it seems to me that the issue on which the [tribunal] should focus when entertaining an [NAME] 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”.

Determination and Reasons

17. The whole purpose of section 20ZA is to permit a landlord to dispense with the consultation requirements of section 20 of the Act if the tribunal is satisfied that it is reasonable for them to be dispensed with. Such an [NAME] may be made retrospectively, as it has been made here.

18. The Tribunal has taken account of the decision in [COMPANY] v [NAME] and [NAME] in reaching its decision.

19. A lift service is necessary to serve, among [NAME], any elderly or vulnerable individuals within the building. There is no evidence before the Tribunal that the Respondents were prejudiced by the failure of the Applicant to comply with the consultation requirements.

20. The Tribunal is therefore satisfied that it is reasonable to grant unconditional retrospective dispensation from the consultation requirements of s.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 in regard to the works set out herein.

21. The Tribunal make no determination as to whether the cost of the works are reasonable or payable. If any [NAME] wishes to challenge the reasonableness of the costs, then a separate [NAME] under s.27A Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 should be made.

22. It is the responsibility of the Applicant to serve a copy of this decision on all Respondents, and [NAME] and to display a copy of this decision in a prominent place in the common parts of the Building.

Name: Judge S. McKeown

Date: 20 May 2025

Rights of appeal 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. 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).