VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Lift Repairs Dispensation Without Conditions

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to bypass the usual consultation process with tenants for urgent lift repairs at Sheldon House because the repairs were necessary and would not cause harm to the tenants.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord is entitled to dispense with consultation requirements if the works are urgent and there is no prejudice to the tenants.

Topics

tenancy disputesrepair worksurgent repairs

Provisions

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA

📖 What the law says

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA

The First-tier Tribunal can grant a request to skip consultation requirements for certain works or long-term agreements if it finds it reasonable to do so.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent lift repairs.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal granted a landlord's application for dispensation from consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, allowing urgent lift repairs at Sheldon House without consulting the tenants due to the urgent nature of the work and lack of prejudice.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00AM/LDC/2019/0118 Property : [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [COMPANY] Respondents :

[redacted] [NAME] of [NAME] : Dispensation with Consultation Requirements under section 20ZA Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. Tribunal Members :

Judge Robert Latham Sue Coughlin MCIEH

Date and venue of Hearing : 2 September 2019 at 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of Decision : 2 September 2019

DECISION

The Tribunal grants this [NAME] to dispense unconditionally with the consultation requirements imposed by section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

2 Reasons 1. By an [NAME] made on 29 July 2019, the Applicant seeks dispensation with the consultation requirements imposed by section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the Act”) in respect of the works described below. The Applicant stated that it was content for the [NAME] to be dealt with on the papers. No Respondent has requested an oral hearing.

2. Sheldon House is a purpose-built block of 18 residential apartments and 8 commercial units. The lift has broken down and requires reinstatement. [NAME] have provided an estimate in the sum of £3,243 + VAT. Scaffold is required as the lift has broken down on the top floor. The contractor will remove the safety gear and carry out a full investigation of the fault. Additional works may be found to be required.

3. On 2 April, the Tribunal issued Directions. On 9 August, the Applicant sent a copy of the [NAME] form and the Directions to all the [NAME]. [NAME] who opposed the [NAME] was directed to complete a Reply Form which was attached to the Directions and return it to the tribunal. No [NAME] has opposed the [NAME].

4. Section 20ZA (1) of the Act provides: “Where an [NAME] 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.”

5. The only issue which this Tribunal has been required to determine is whether or not it is reasonable to dispense with the statutory consultation requirements. This [NAME] does not concern the issue of whether any service charge costs will be reasonable or payable.

6. The Tribunal is satisfied that it is reasonable to grant dispensation from the subsequent stages of the consultation requirements. This is justified by the urgent need for the works to reinstate the lift. There is no suggestion that any prejudice has arisen. In the circumstances, it is appropriate to grant dispensation without any conditions.

Judge Robert Latham, 2 September 2019

3

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. 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).

📊 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 considered urgent.
  • There is no prejudice to the tenants.
  • The works are necessary to prevent damage.
  • The landlord seeks dispensation under relevant urgent conditions.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The application does not meet statutory requirements.
  • The landlord's notice is defective.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

It decided to grant the landlord dispensation from the consultation requirements for urgent lift repairs.

Who was involved?

The landlord and the tenants of Sheldon House were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to grant dispensation because the repairs were urgent and there was no indication that the tenants would suffer any prejudice.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, specifically section 20ZA, was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The urgency of the repair work and the absence of any potential harm to the tenants were the most important arguments.

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 might also be able to obtain dispensation from consultation requirements if their repair work is urgent and there is no risk of prejudice to the tenants.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The estimate for the repair work and the lack of opposition from the tenants were important factors.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal within 28 days.

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 legal matters.

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.