First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Repairs Dispensation Without Consultation
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to carry out urgent repairs to drains and a lift without consulting the tenants first. The repairs were necessary because blocked drains caused sewage to enter the lift shaft, requiring immediate action to remove the sewage and fix the lift. The Tribunal decided that the landlord had taken all reasonable steps to ensure the repairs were done promptly and that there was no harm to the tenants.
⚖️ Legal holding
Dispensation from consultation requirements under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 may be granted if the works are urgent and there is no prejudice to the tenants.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for urgent repair works.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for urgent repairs to drains and lift in a residential property. The repairs were deemed necessary due to blocked drains causing sewage to enter the lift shaft, necessitating immediate action to remove the sewage and repair the lift. The Tribunal found that the applicant took all reasonable steps to undertake the repairs in a timely manner, ensuring no prejudice to the tenants.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AY/LDC/2023/0145 P:Paperremote Property : 17 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [NAME] Respondents :
[redacted] schedule attached to the application
Type of application : To dispense with the consultation requirements under S.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal member :
[NAME] and venue of determination : 12 September 2023 Remote on the papers
DECISION
This has been a remote hearing on the papers which has been consented to by the Applicant and not objected to by the Respondent. A face to face hearing was not held because it was not practicable, no-one requested the same, and all the issues could be determined on the papers. The documents that I was referred to were in an electronic bundle, the contents of which I have recorded.
2
Decision of the tribunal (1) The Tribunal grants dispensation from all of the consultation requirements under S.20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 in relation to unblocking the drains and carrying out consequential works to the lift and lift shaft. (2) The question of reasonableness of the works or cost was not included in this application, the sole purpose of which is to seek dispensation. The Background 1. The application under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the Act”) was made by [NAME] on behalf of the applicants on 25 May 2023.
2. The application concerned urgent clearing of the drains, removing sewage from the lift shaft and repairing the lift.
3. Directions were issued on 22 June 2023 requiring the applicant to prepare bundles by 7 September 2023 to include statements (i) Setting out the full grounds for the application, including all of the documents on which the landlord relies and copies of any replies from the tenants; (ii) The Leaseholders were asked to confirm by 2 December 2022 whether or not they would give their consent to the application. (iii) In the event that such agreement was not forthcoming the leaseholders were to state why they opposed the application; and provide copies of all documents to be relied upon.
4. On 13 July 2023 [NAME], on behalf of the applicant, confirmed that in accordance with the Directions the leaseholders had each been sent a copy of the [POSTCODE] application form, the applicant’s statement of case, a copy of the Directions and reply form.
5. The Leaseholders were informed in the Directions issued by the Tribunal that the question of reasonableness of the works or cost was not included in this application, the sole purpose of which is to seek dispensation.
3
The Evidence 6. 17 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] originally comprised commercial premises on the ground floor with offices above. In about 2023 the building was converted into nine flats with access being provided via a central staircase and a lift.
7. A few days before Christmas the managing agents were advised by one of the leaseholders that water could be herd entering the lift shaft. A [NAME] was asked to investigate. The drains were blocked and were backing up into the lift shaft. The lift had to be removed as part of the process of removing the sewage and deep cleaning the lift shaft. During the course of the work the lift car was damaged.
8. The work was urgent, consequently no consultation was undertaken. It was considered imperative that the lift should be returned to working order as quickly as possible. The cost of the drainage work and lift works exceeded the Section 20 limit.
9. None of the leaseholders had objected to the work. The Decision 10. The relevant test to be applied in an application for dispensation was set out by the Supreme Court in [COMPANY] v [NAME] & Ors [2013] UKSC 14 where it was held that the purpose of the section 20 consultation procedure was to protect tenants from paying for inappropriate works or paying an inappropriate amount. Dispensation should not result in prejudice to the tenant.
11. The Tribunal determines from the evidence before it that the applicant took all reasonable steps to undertake the repairs in a timely manner to ensure that the sewage was removed from the lift pit, the lift shaft given a deep clean and the lift returned to working order. There have been no objections from any leaseholder and no prejudice to the lessees has been demonstrated or asserted.
12. On the evidence before it, and in these circumstances, the Tribunal considers that the application for dispensation be granted.
4 Name: [NAME]: 12 September 2023
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.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Fire Safety Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Lift Repairs Dispensation Without Consult…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Ground Water Pump Replacement
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Works Dispensation Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Lift Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Awarded Compensation for Property Encroachments
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Emergency Repairs Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Lease Premium at £34833
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Balcony Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Boundary Wall Rebuilding
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Repairs
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 work to clear the drains and repair the lift was urgent, so no consultation was done.
- The managing agents acted quickly to investigate the issue after a leaseholder reported water entering the lift shaft.
- The applicant took all reasonable steps to perform the repairs in a timely manner.
- No leaseholders objected to the application for dispensation.
- No leaseholders showed or claimed that they were harmed by the lack of consultation.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
It decided to grant dispensation from consultation requirements under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for urgent repairs to drains and a lift.
Who was involved?
The landlord and the tenants of a residential property were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant dispensation because the repairs were urgent and necessary to remove sewage from the lift shaft and repair the lift, and there was no prejudice to the tenants.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, specifically section 20, was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the repairs were urgent and necessary to address a serious issue with sewage backing up into the lift shaft.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case, allowing the landlord to carry out the repairs without consulting the tenants.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may also be able to obtain dispensation from consultation requirements if the repairs are urgent and necessary to address a serious issue.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence of the urgency of the repairs and the necessity to address the sewage issue in the lift shaft 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 of receiving the written reasons for the decision.
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.
