Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Damp Proofing Works
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to bypass certain consultation requirements for urgent repairs needed to fix damp issues in a property. The repairs were deemed necessary to prevent further damage and potential health risks to residents.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord is entitled to dispensation from consultation requirements under s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 if the works are urgent and necessary to prevent further damage and risk to residents.
📖 What the law says
Under this section, a landlord can apply to a tribunal for permission to bypass consultation requirements related to certain works or long-term agreements if the tribunal finds it reasonable to do so. The consultation requirements refer to rules set by the Secretary of State that require landlords to consult with tenants or recognized tenants' associations before undertaking certain works or agreements.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent damp-proofing works.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal granted a landlord dispensation from consultation requirements under s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for urgent damp-proofing works to prevent further damage and risk to residents. The decision was made by Judge Tonya Richards-Clarke.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AY/LDC/2025/0855 Property : 146 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [APPELLANT] Respondents : [redacted] Type of application : Dispensation of consultation requirements under s.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal member : Judge Tonya Richards-Clarke Venue : Remote Paper hearing Date of decision : 18 November 2025
DECISION
Decision of the tribunal 1. The Tribunal grants the application for the dispensation of all or any of the consultation requirements provided for by s.20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 ("the Act") in relation to remedial works to remedy damp affecting sections of the internal wall by damp proofing and repainting internal walls.
The application
2 2. The Applicant seeks a determination pursuant to s.20ZA of the Act for the dispensation of all or any of the consultation requirements provided for by s.20 of the Act. The application was dated 05 September 2025.
3. Directions of the Tribunal were issued on 3 October 2025. The [NAME] has complied with the service requirements of these directions by sending to each of the leaseholders a copy of the application, a brief statement explain the reasons for the application and the directions. These were also displayed at the entrance corridor of the property.
4. The case was listed for a paper determination. Neither party requested an oral hearing. The hearing 5. The matter was determined by way of a paper hearing which took place on 18 November 2025. The background 6. The property which is the subject of this application is a double fronted 4 storey terraced property. The ground floor is occupied by a restaurant and the 3 stories above each have 2 one bedroom flats, making a total of 6 for the block. The 1st and 2nd storey flats use the original building facade whilst the 3rd storey flats are built into the roof area. The property is approximately 80 - 100 years old and built using standard construction materials and methods.
The application 7. The Applicant has applied for dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements in respect of qualifying works due to areas of damp affecting sections of the internal wall. The property has had problems with the roof and while these have now been remedied damp patches are causing an issue and urgent damp coursing is required. The applicant seeks to mitigate further damage and a risk that that this will spread to the other parts of the building and cause black mould to form posing an immediate risk to the safety and well-being of the residents. This is why the application is said to be urgent.
8. There Applicant has obtained a quote for the remedial works in the sum of £4051.50 plus VAT. 9. The only issue for the Tribunal is whether it is reasonable to dispense with the statutory consultation requirements. This application did not concern the issue of whether any service charge costs will be reasonable or payable.
3 10. No notice was received from any of the Respondents opposing the application. The decision of the Tribunal 11. s.20 of the Act provides for the limitation of service charges in the event that the statutory consultation requirements are not met. The consultation requirements apply where the works are qualifying works (as in this case) and only £250 can be recovered from a tenant in respect of such works unless the consultation requirements have either been complied with or dispensed with.
12. Dispensation is dealt with by s.20ZA of the Act which provides: - "Where an application is made to a leasehold valuation 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"
13. Taking into account that there have been no objections to this application from the Respondents, the Tribunal could not find prejudice to any of the leaseholders of the property by the granting of dispensation relating to the urgent works to remedy damp affecting sections of the internal wall by damp proofing and repainting internal walls.
14. As a result, the Tribunal believes that it is reasonable to allow dispensation in relation to the subject matter of the application.
15.
Accordingly, the Tribunal grants the Applicant’s application for the dispensation of all or any of the consultation requirements provided for by section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 in relation to urgent remedial works to remedy damp affecting sections of the internal walls at the property by damp proofing and repainting internal walls. The Tribunal is satisfied that, in the particular circumstances of this case, involving risks to the occupant(s) of the affected flats and/or of further damage to this and other flats at the property, it is reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements.
16. The Tribunal's determination is limited to this application for dispensation of consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the Act
Name: [NAME]: 18 November 2025
4
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 application for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with the case. 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. 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. 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. If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application 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 Grants Landlord Permission for Urgent Repairs Due to Wa…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Major Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Urgent Lift Repairs Dispensation in First-tier Tribunal Ca…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rules on Lease Breaches
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Drainage Repairs Due to Dry Rot
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Allowed to Skip Consultation for Urgent Cladding Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Service Charge Limitation Ruling by First-tier Tribunal
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Fire Safety Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roofing Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Drainage Works
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 tribunal granted the application for dispensation because the remedial works were urgent.
- The landlord provided a brief statement explaining the reasons for the application to the leaseholders.
- The landlord needed to prevent further damage and the spread of black mould, which posed an immediate risk to residents.
- No leaseholders objected to the application, so the tribunal found no prejudice in granting dispensation.
- The property had existing damp issues affecting internal walls, requiring damp proofing and repainting.
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 certain consultation requirements for urgent repairs needed to fix damp issues in a property.
Who was involved?
The landlord and various leaseholders of a multi-story property in London were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant the landlord's request because the works were urgent and necessary to prevent further damage and health risks to residents.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, specifically sections 20 and 20ZA, were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The urgency and necessity of the repairs to prevent further damage and health risks to residents was the central argument.
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 be able to bypass consultation requirements if their repairs are urgent and necessary to prevent further damage and health risks.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence of the urgency and necessity of the repairs was likely presented, including quotes for the work and details of previous roof problems.
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 seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving property management and legal disputes.
