VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Repairs Due to Water Ingress

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to bypass the usual consultation process for urgent repairs needed due to water leaking into three flats. This decision was made because there were no objections from the tenants and no identified harm from skipping the consultation.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord is entitled to dispensation from consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the 1985 Act if there are no objections from tenants and no identified prejudice.

Topics

dispensation from consultationurgent repairsLandlord and Tenant Act 1985

Provisions

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA

📖 What the law says

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA

This section allows a tribunal to grant a request to skip consultation requirements for certain works or long-term agreements if the tribunal 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 under section 20ZA of the 1985 Act for urgent repairs.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the 1985 Act to a landlord for urgent repairs due to water ingress affecting three flats. The tribunal considered it reasonable and appropriate to dispense with the consultation requirements due to the absence of objections from tenants and the failure to identify any prejudice caused by the lack of consultation.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AW/LDC/2023/0023 HMCTS code (paper, video, audio)

P: PAPERREMOTE Property : 42 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [NAME] Respondents : [redacted] [NAME] [NAME] (4) [COUNSEL] (5) [COUNSEL] : N/A Type of application : Dispensation from consultation – section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal member(s) : Judge [NAME] Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 27 March 2023

DECISION

2 The tribunal’s summary decision (1) The tribunal grants the applicant dispensation from the consultation

requirements of section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for

the purpose of the works required to remedy the ingress of water at the

rear of the building affecting three flats due to failed pointing.

The application 1. The applicant seeks the grant of dispensation from the consultation

requirements of section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (‘the

1985 Act) for the purposes of urgent works carried out to remedy the

ingress of water due to failed pointing at the rear of the building. 2. The subject property is a terraced building converted into 5 self-

contained flats A – E. The applicant’s case 3. In support of the application the applicant relied upon a bundle of 56

pages which included a quote for the works in the sum of £2650 plus

VAT and photographs of the affected area. The respondent’s case 4. Neither the respondent or the tribunal received and objections to the

application from the lessee respondents. The tribunal’s decision and reasons 5. The tribunal grants the applicant the dispensation sought pursuant to

section 20ZA of the 1985 Act. 6. The tribunal is satisfied the respondent were notified of this

application due to the inclusion of responses from various lessee in

respect of proposed works and this application. 7. In the absence of any objections from the lessees and the failure to

identify any prejudice caused by the lack of consultation, the tribunal

considers it reasonable and appropriate to dispense with the

consultation requirements of the 1985 Act; [COMPANY] v Benson and others [2013] UKSC 14 & [2013} & UKSC 54. Name: Judge Tagliavini

Date: 25 March 2023

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 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:

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 landlord can be dispensed from consultation requirements if there are no objections from tenants.
  • Dispensation is allowed if the works are urgent and necessary to prevent further damage.
  • The absence of identified prejudice to tenants supports the landlord's entitlement to dispensation.
  • The landlord is entitled to dispensation if the works are unique and meaningful consultation is impossible.
  • The Tribunal grants dispensation when the works are essential to address severe issues like water leaks.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The appeal is struck out if not submitted within the prescribed time limit, even with health issues.

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 repairs.

Who was involved?

The landlord and several tenants were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to grant dispensation because there were no objections from tenants and no identified harm from skipping the consultation.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the absence of objections from tenants and the lack of identified prejudice.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the person who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation might also be able to get dispensation if there are no objections from tenants and no identified harm.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Photographs of the affected area and a quote for the repair work were important.

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 seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases like this.

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.