Landlord Allowed to Carry Out Urgent Repairs Without Consulting Tenants
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal allowed the landlord to carry out urgent repairs without consulting the tenants because of a severe water leak. This decision was made as there were no objections raised by the tenants and the repairs were deemed necessary to address the leak.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord may obtain dispensation to carry out urgent repairs without consulting tenants if the works are necessary to address a severe water leak.
📖 What the law says
This section allows a tribunal to grant dispensation to a landlord to bypass consultation requirements with tenants if the tribunal finds it reasonable to do so. The consultation requirements refer to rules set by the Secretary of State regarding providing details of proposed works or agreements, obtaining estimates, inviting tenants to suggest estimators, considering tenant observations, and giving reasons for certain actions.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal granted dispensation to the landlord to carry out urgent repairs without consulting tenants due to a severe water leak.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal granted dispensation to the landlord to carry out urgent repairs without consulting tenants due to a severe water leak at the premises. The decision was made based on the urgent need to address the water leak and the lack of objections from the tenants.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AY/LDC/2021/0170 HMCTS code (paper, video, audio) : P: PAPERREMOTE Property : 49-83 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant: [redacted] London Borough of Lambeth Representative : Ref: HOS/LIT/HKARA/648481 Ms [COUNSEL] [NAME] Respondent : [redacted] [NAME] : N/A Type of [NAME] : [NAME] for dispensation of consultation requirements – s.20ZA Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal members : Judge Tagliavini Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 8 November 2021
DECISION
2
Covid-19 pandemic: description of hearing This has been a remote on the papers which has not been to by the parties. The form of remote hearing was P: PAPERREMOTE. A face-to-face hearing was not held because it was not practicable, and all issues could be determined in on paper. The documents that the tribunal are in a bundle of 68 pages, the contents of which I have noted. The order made is described at the end of these reasons. Decision of the tribunal (1) The tribunal determines that is appropriate to grant the applicant unconditional dispensation to consult in respect of the urgent works carried out under a long-term qualifying agreement, to remedy the water leak affecting the subject premises at 49-83 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] (‘the premises’). ________________________________________________ The [NAME]
1. The Applicant seeks a determination pursuant to s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the 1985 Act”) in respect of urgent works to remedy a water leak affecting the subject premises. .] The hearing 2. The hearing was held remotely on the papers provided by the applicant in its hearing bundle (pp 1-68). The background 3. The property which is the subject of this [NAME] is a purpose-built block of flats on two stories.
4. The respondents hold a long lease of the property which requires the landlord to provide services and the tenant to contribute towards their costs by way of a variable service charge.
5. Having heard evidence and submissions from the parties and considered all the documents provided, the tribunal has made determinations on the various issues as follows. The applicants’ case
3 6. The applicant relied on written submissions attached to the [NAME], and included a report of [COMPANY] dated 23 July 2020, confirming the nature and extent of the severe water leak identified by [NAME] on 17 July 2020, and the remedial works required in the quoted sum of £6516.00 plus VAT. These works were subsequently carried out on the applicant’s instruction. The respondent’s case 7. No objections or other communications were received by the applicant and the tribunal from the respondents, objecting to this [NAME], or identifying any prejudice that would be caused by the lack of consultation. The tribunal’s decision and reasons 8. In the absence of any objection to this [NAME], the tribunal finds it is reasonable and appropriate to grant the dispensation sought by the applicant, pursuant to s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, in respect of the urgent works to remedy a severe water leak. Name: Judge Tagliavini Date: 8 November 2021
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 [NAME] which has been dealing with the case. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the [NAME] 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.
4 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:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Corrects Minor Error in Tenant's Service Charge
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Repairs to Prevent Damage
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Holding Deposit Refund Under Tenant Fees Act 2019
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Fire Safety Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Freeholder Granted Permission for Urgent Roof Repairs Without Tenant Consul…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation from Consultation Requirements for …
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Freeholder Granted Dispensation for Emergency Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins: Incorrect Rent Increase Notice Invalidated
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Freehold Premium
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Right to Manage Over Premises
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Varies Prohibition Order to Allow Residence
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rules on Lease Breaches
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 necessary to address a severe water leak.
- The landlord seeks dispensation to carry out urgent repairs.
- The repairs pose significant safety risks.
- The works are deemed essential and urgent.
- The landlord is entitled to dispensation under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- No relevant cases provided where the claimant was decided against.
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 carry out urgent repairs without consulting the tenants due to a severe water leak.
Who was involved?
The landlord and the tenants were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant dispensation to the landlord because there were no objections from the tenants and the repairs were necessary to address a severe water leak.
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 argument that mattered most was the urgent need to repair the water leak and the lack of objections from the tenants.
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 may also seek dispensation to carry out urgent repairs without consulting tenants if there is a severe issue that needs immediate attention.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence of the severity of the water leak and the lack of objections from the tenants mattered.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to get advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving landlord and tenant disputes.
