VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Lift Repairs Dispensation

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to bypass consultation requirements for urgent lift repairs at a converted mill property. The decision was based on the need to ensure the safety and comfort of the residents, especially those with mobility issues.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord may be dispensed from consultation requirements if the work is urgent and necessary for the health, safety, utility, and comfort of the property's occupants.

Topics

tenancy disputesurgent repairs

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

The First-tier Tribunal can grant a request to waive consultation requirements for certain works if it determines that waiving these requirements is reasonable.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent lift repairs under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal granted a landlord dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent lift repairs at a converted mill property. The Tribunal concluded that the repairs were necessary for the health, safety, utility, and comfort of the property's occupants, particularly those with mobility issues.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

1

Case Reference : MAN/OOCX/LDC/2019/0037

Property : [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Applicant : [redacted] Applicant’s representative : [NAME]

Respondents : [redacted] Property

Type of Application : Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 – Section 20ZA

Tribunal Members : [NAME] (Deputy Regional Judge) [NAME] (Deputy Regional Valuer)

Date of determination : 28 October 2019

Date of Decision : 29 October 2019

DECISION

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2019

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2 Application

1. [RESPONDENT] applies to the Tribunal under Section 20ZA of Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (the Act) for dispensation from the consultation requirements of Section 20 of the Act and the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements)(England) Regulations 2003 (SI 2003/1987) in respect of work to the lift at [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] (the Property).

2. The Respondents are Leaseholders of flats at the Property.

Grounds and Submissions

3. The application was received by the Tribunal on 12 September 2019.

4. The Applicant is the Management Company named in the [NAME].

5. On 18 September 2019 Deputy Regional Judge Holbrook made directions which provided that in the absence of a request for a hearing the application would be determined upon the parties’ written submissions.

6. The Property is a converted mill, adjacent to a canal now comprising 32 Leasehold residential flats with one passenger lift, one pump set and one water tank.

7. The Applicant stated in the application form that the passenger lift has had an increasing frequency of breakdowns during 2018 leading to residents being trapped and distressed. The work is required to address the issues.

8. Further information gives an itemised list of work to install a new control system, an estimate and options for the repairs.

9. The Applicant states that a Section 20 Consultation Letter was issued on 5 September 2019. A copy has been provided with [NAME] correspondence.

10. The Applicant states that the lack of a lift in working order affects the ability of some of the residents to leave their flats. There is no other lift and the only other means of access is stairs. It mentions the effect on the elderly and residents with mobility issues.

11. In accordance with directions the Applicant has provided a sample Lease, copy lift report and a statement of case which identifies that the lift is approximately 15 years old and explains the tender and quotation exercise. The application has been made because of urgency and concern for the residents which requires action before the consultation process can be completed.

12. The Tribunal did not receive submissions from a [NAME] in accordance with directions.

3 13. The Tribunal convened without the parties to make its determination on 28 October 2019.

Law

14. Section 18 of the Act defines “service charge” and “relevant costs”.

15. Section 19 of the Act limits the amount payable by the lessees to the extent that the charges are reasonably incurred.

16. Section 20 of the Act states:- “Limitation of service charges: consultation requirements

Where this Section applies to any qualifying works…… the relevant contributions of tenants are limited……. Unless the consultation requirements have either:- a. complied with in relation to the works or b. dispensed with in relation to the works by …… a leasehold valuation tribunal. This Section applies to qualifying works, if relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works exceed an appropriate amount”.

17. “The appropriate amount” is defined by regulation 6 of The Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003 (the Regulations) as “……. an amount which results in the relevant contribution of any tenant being more than £250.00.”

18. Section 20ZA(1) of the Act states:- "Where an application is made to a Tribunal for a determination to dispense with all or any of the consultation requirements in relation to any qualifying works ……..….. the tribunal may make the determination if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements."

Tribunal’s Conclusions with Reasons

19. We considered the written evidence accompanying the application.

Our conclusions are:-

20. It is not necessary for us to consider at this stage the extent of the service charges that would result from the works payable under the terms of the Respondent’s leases. If and when such is demanded and if disputed, it may properly be the subject of a future application to the Tribunal.

21. We accept from the details of the work proposed and the obvious consequences of lift safety and failure that it is necessary for it to commence without delay. The lack of repair and service has potential to impact on the health, safety, utility and comfort of occupiers and visitors to the apartments at the Property, more so, bearing in mind the age of some occupiers.

4

22. Although formal consultation has not been completed, information has been given to the Respondents and we have not identified a specific prejudice to them in the circumstances. Dispensation from consultation requirements does not imply that the resulting service charge is reasonable.

23. We conclude it reasonable in accordance with Section 20ZA(1) of the Act to dispense with the consultation requirements, specified in Section 20 and contained in Service Charges (Consultation Requirements)(England) Regulations 2003 (SI 2003/1987).

24. Nothing in this determination or order shall preclude consideration of whether the Applicant may recover by way of service charge from the Respondents any or all of the cost of the work undertaken or the costs of this application should a reference be received under Section 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

Order

25. The Applicant is dispensed from complying with the consultation requirements in respect of the work specified in the application.

[NAME] Tribunal Judge 29 October 2019

5 [NAME] Mrs [NAME] Mr & Mrs [NAME] Mr & Mrs [NAME] Mr & Mrs [COMPANY] Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] [NAME] Mr & Mrs [NAME] Mr [NAME] Mr & Mrs [NAME] [NAME] Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] Ms [NAME] Mr [NAME] [NAME] Mr [NAME] [NAME] Mr & Mrs [NAME] Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] Ms [NAME] & Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] [NAME] Mr & Mrs [NAME] Ms [NAME]

📊 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 lift work was urgent and necessary due to safety concerns and potential impact on residents' health and comfort.
  • The lift had frequent breakdowns, trapping and distressing residents.
  • The lack of a working lift affected residents' ability to leave their flats, especially the elderly and those with mobility issues.

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 consultation requirements for urgent lift repairs.

Who was involved?

The landlord and leaseholders of residential flats at a converted mill property.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided that the repairs were necessary due to the increasing frequency of lift breakdowns and the impact on residents' safety and comfort.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements)(England) Regulations 2003.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that the repairs were urgent and necessary for the health, safety, utility, and comfort of the property's occupants.

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 may also be able to bypass consultation requirements if they can demonstrate that the repairs are urgent and necessary for resident safety and comfort.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence included a detailed list of work to be done, an estimate, and information about the lift's condition and the impact on residents.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions from the First-tier Tribunal can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal.

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

Yes, it is recommended to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving urgent repairs and consultation requirements.

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.
Tribunal Grants Urgent Lift Repairs Dispensation | VadeLab