Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Repairs to Communal Water Pumps
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to bypass consultation requirements for urgent repairs to communal water pumps in a block of flats because no leaseholder objected.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord may be dispensed from consultation requirements if the works are urgent and no leaseholder objects.
📖 What the law says
This section allows a tribunal to grant dispensation from consultation requirements if it deems it reasonable to do so. It defines 'qualifying works' as works on a building or premises and outlines the types of requirements that can be prescribed by regulations.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent repairs to communal water pumps.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for urgent repairs to communal water pumps in a block of flats. No leaseholder objected to the application.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2013
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00AG/LDC/2021/0179 HMCTS Code : P: PAPER REMOTE Property : 59 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicant: [redacted] represented by [APPELLANT] Respondent: [redacted] :
Dispensation from consultation requirements under Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 section 20ZA Tribunal Members :
Judge Professor R Percival
Venue : Remote paper determination Date of Decision : 30 September 2021
DECISION
2
Decisions of the tribunal (1) The Tribunal, pursuant to section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the 1985 Act”), grants dispensation from the consultation requirements in respect of the works the subject of the application. Procedural 1. The landlord submitted an application for retrospective dispensation from the consultation requirements in section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the 1985 Act”) and the regulations thereunder, dated 5 July 2021.
2. The Tribunal gave directions on 27 July 2021. The directions provided for a form to be distributed to those who pay the service charge to allow them to object to or agree with the applications, and, if objecting, to provide such further material as they sought to rely on. The application and directions was required to be sent to [RESPONDENT] and any sublessees, and to be displayed as a notice in the common parts of the property. The deadline for return of the forms, to the Applicant and the Tribunal, was 20 August 2021.
3. The Applicant confirmed that the relevant documentation had been sent, and posted as notices, as required by the directions.
4. It appears that the Applicant has not provided a schedule of [RESPONDENT]. Nonetheless, no response from a [RESPONDENT] has been received by the Tribunal, and the Applicant confirms that no reply has been received by it. The property and the works 5. The property is a block of eight flats.
6. The block is served by two communal water pumps. On inspection in June 2021 by [NAME], one of the pumps was found to be inoperative, so the system was relying entirely on the second pump. However, the second pump was also operating at a lower than acceptable level, and the [NAME] recommended replacing both pumps as the same time, in view of the danger of the second pump also failing. The estimate for the works was £7,318.66.
7. The application states that the Applicants planned to have the work undertaken in July, and it is assumed that it has been completed.
3 Determination 8. The Tribunal is concerned solely with an application under section 20ZA of the 1985 Act to dispense with the consultation requirements under section 20 of the same Act.
9. In the first place, I accept that prudence dictates undertaking the work to both pumps as a matter of some urgency. Were the second pump to fail before consultation had been completed, [RESPONDENT] would have been put to considerable inconvenience.
10. Secondly, as stated, no response has been received from the [RESPONDENT]. As a result, none of [RESPONDENT] have sought to claim any prejudice as a result of the consultation requirements not having been satisfied. Where that is the case, the Tribunal must, quite apart from any question of urgency, allow the application: [COMPANY] v [NAME] and others [2013] UKSC 14; [2013] 1 WLR 854.
11. This application relates solely to the granting of dispensation. If the [RESPONDENT] considers the cost of the works to be excessive or the quality of the workmanship poor, or if costs sought to be recovered through the service charge are otherwise not reasonably incurred, then it is open to them to apply to the Tribunal for a determination of those issues under section 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
Name: Judge Prof Richard Percival Date: 30 September 2021
4 Appendix of relevant legislation
Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (as amended) Section 20 (1) Where this section applies to any qualifying works or qualifying long term agreement, the relevant contributions of tenants are limited in accordance with subsection (6) or (7) (or both) unless the consultation requirements have been either— (a) complied with in relation to the works or agreement, or (b) dispensed with in relation to the works or agreement by (or on appeal from) the appropriate tribunal . (2) In this section “relevant contribution”, in relation to a tenant and any works or agreement, is the amount which he may be required under the terms of his lease to contribute (by the payment of service charges) to relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works or under the agreement. (3) This section applies to qualifying works if relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works exceed an appropriate amount. (4) The Secretary of State may by regulations provide that this section applies to a qualifying long term agreement— (a) if relevant costs incurred under the agreement exceed an appropriate amount, or (b) if relevant costs incurred under the agreement during a period prescribed by the regulations exceed an appropriate amount. (5) An appropriate amount is an amount set by regulations made by the Secretary of State; and the regulations may make provision for either or both of the following to be an appropriate amount— (a) an amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations, and (b) an amount which results in the relevant contribution of any one or more tenants being an amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations. (6) Where an appropriate amount is set by virtue of paragraph (a) of subsection (5), the amount of the relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works or under the agreement which may be taken into account in determining the relevant contributions of tenants is limited to the appropriate amount. (7) Where an appropriate amount is set by virtue of paragraph (b) of that subsection, the amount of the relevant contribution of the tenant, or each of the tenants, whose relevant contribution would otherwise exceed the amount prescribed by, or determined in
5 accordance with, the regulations is limited to the amount so prescribed or determined.] Section 20ZA
(1) 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. (2) In section 20 and this section— “qualifying works” means works on a building or any other premises, and “qualifying long term agreement” means (subject to subsection (3)) an agreement entered into, by or on behalf of the landlord or a [NAME], for a term of more than twelve months. (3) The Secretary of State may by regulations provide that an agreement is not a qualifying long term agreement— (a) if it is an agreement of a description prescribed by the regulations, or (b) in any circumstances so prescribed. (4) In section 20 and this section “the consultation requirements” means requirements prescribed by regulations made by the Secretary of State. (5) Regulations under subsection (4) may in particular include provision requiring the landlord— (a) to provide details of proposed works or agreements to tenants or the [COMPANY] representing them, (b) to obtain estimates for proposed works or agreements, (c) to invite tenants or the [COMPANY] to propose the names of persons from whom the landlord should try to obtain other estimates, (d) to have regard to observations made by tenants or the [COMPANY] in relation to proposed works or agreements and estimates, and (e) to give reasons in prescribed circumstances for carrying out works or entering into agreements. (6) Regulations under section 20 or this section— (a) may make provision generally or only in relation to specific cases, and (b) may make different provision for different purposes. (7) Regulations under section 20 or this section shall be made by statutory instrument which shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Freeholder Lift Repairs Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants £2,150 Repair Dispensation for London Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Management Agent Granted Dispensation for Urgent Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants £7,075.81 Retrospective Dispensation for Assured Tenancy in…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Water Main Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants £59,305 Dispensation for Urgent Repairs in Lambeth
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants £34,519 Fire Safety Works Dispensation in London Flats
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal grants dispensation for urgent repairs costing £6,262.75
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants £55,000 Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs in Victorian H…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants £52,257 Lift Repair Dispensation in London
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants £225 Dispensation for Urgent Boiler Flue Replacement in Lon…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants £1,700 Soil Pipe Replacement Without Tenant Consultation
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 accepted that replacing both water pumps was urgent to avoid considerable inconvenience to leaseholders.
- No leaseholder responded to the application, indicating no prejudice from the lack of consultation.
- The landlord confirmed that all required documentation was sent and posted as notices.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for the landlord to undertake urgent repairs to communal water pumps costing £7,318.66.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the landlord could bypass the consultation requirements for urgent repairs to communal water pumps in a block of flats.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant dispensation because no objections were raised and the works were urgent, as the second pump was operating at a lower than acceptable level and there was a risk of total failure.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, section 20ZA, was applied to grant dispensation from consultation requirements.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the urgency of the works and the lack of objections from tenants.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case, the landlord.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation can seek dispensation from consultation requirements if the works are urgent and there are no objections from tenants.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence included the recommendation from an inspector that the pumps needed to be replaced due to the failure of one pump and the reduced efficiency of the second pump.
