Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Repairs to Rainwater Pipe
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to bypass formal consultation for urgent repairs to a rainwater pipe because the tenants did not object and were not substantially prejudiced.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord is entitled to dispensation from consultation for urgent repairs if the tenants have not objected or suffered substantial prejudice.
📖 What the law says
This section allows a tribunal to grant dispensation from consultation requirements if it finds it reasonable to do so. It defines 'qualifying works' as works on a building or premises and 'qualifying long term agreement' as an agreement lasting over twelve months. The consultation requirements can include providing details of proposed works or agreements to tenants, 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 from consultation for urgent repairs to a rainwater pipe under s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal granted dispensation to a landlord for urgent repairs to a rainwater pipe under s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, as the tenants had not objected and had not suffered substantial prejudice.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference :
LON/00BA/LDC/2025/0811
Property : 1-14 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : MCS Ref: [COUNSEL] Respondents : [redacted] : N/A Type of [NAME] : Dispensation for consultation – s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal member : Judge Tagliavini Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 17 November 2025
DECISION
2 Decisions of the tribunal (1) The tribunal grants the applicant the dispensation from consultation
sought in respect of works of repair to a rainwater pipe and carried out
in August 2025 by [NAME].J. [NAME] ([NAME]) in the
sum of £4,380.00 (inc. VAT). _____________________________________________________ The [NAME] 1. The applicant seeks dispensation from consultation pursuant to s.20ZA
of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The background 2. The subject property is a purpose-built block of 14 flats. 3. The applicant seeks dispensation from consultation in respect of works
of repair to a defective vertical rainwater pipe which has caused the
ingress of water into four flats and the communal areas and
substantial damage. One of the four flats is said to have become
uninhabitable due to the ingress of water. In addition the water ingress
presents a potential source of danger to electrical installations located in
the basement of the premises.
4. The respondents were not served with an s.20 consultation notices but
notified informally of the need for urgent works which were carried out
in August 2025 by [NAME].[NAME]. [NAME] in the sum of £4,380.00 (inc. VAT).
Subsequently, the [NAME] were individually provided
with a copy of the [NAME] and the tribunal’s Directions by the
applicant. The hearing 5. Neither party requested an oral hearing and therefore the tribunal
determined the [NAME] using the 72 digital bundle provided by the
applicant. 6. No objections to the [NAME] were received from the respondents. The decision 7. The tribunal is satisfied that works to the pump providing a water supply
to the subject premises were required as a matter of urgency. The
tribunal is also satisfied the respondents have not objected to the
[NAME] and/or have failed to show they have been caused any
3
substantial prejudice by the absence of any consultation prior to the
works being carried out; [COMPANY] v [NAME]
[2011] EWCA Civ 38. 8. Therefore, the tribunal grants the dispensation from consultation sought
by the applicant in respect of works to the rainwater pipe as carried out
by [NAME].[NAME] in the sum of £4,380.00 (inc VAT)..
Name:
Judge Tagliavini Date: 17 November 2025
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 Regional Office which has been dealing with the case. The [NAME] should be made on Form RP PTA available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-rp-pta-[NAME]-for- permission-to-appeal-a-decision-to-the-upper-tribunal-lands-chamber The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the Regional Office 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. If the Tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further [NAME] for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
4
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 10 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Urgent Lift Repairs Dispensation in First-tier Tribunal Ca…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Urgent Works Dispensation for Assured Tenancy in London
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) RTM Company Granted Dispensation for Urgent Electrical Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants £2,100 Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs in Central Lond…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets £800/month Rent for Assured Tenancy in Taunton
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Reduces Financial Penalty to £500
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Allows Freeholder to Vary Leases for Sinking Fund and I…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants £13,500 Lift Repair Dispensation for High-Rise Tenancy in L…
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 were urgently needed to repair a defective rainwater pipe that caused water ingress and substantial damage.
- One of the flats became uninhabitable due to the water ingress, highlighting the urgency of the repairs.
- The water ingress posed a potential danger to electrical installations in the basement.
- The tenants did not object to the application for dispensation from consultation.
- The tenants failed to show they suffered any substantial prejudice from the lack of prior consultation.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tribunal granted dispensation for urgent repairs costing £4,380.00 under s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the tenant could obtain dispensation from consultation for urgent repairs to a rainwater pipe that had caused significant damage.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant dispensation because the repairs were necessary to prevent substantial damage and potential danger to electrical installations in the basement.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the repairs were urgent and necessary to prevent substantial damage and potential danger.
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 can seek dispensation from consultation for urgent repairs if the repairs are necessary to prevent substantial damage and potential danger.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the evidence or documents that mattered.
