VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Repairs Without Consultation

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to skip consulting tenants about urgent repairs, but only if the landlord provides certain information to the tenants.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord may obtain dispensation from consultation requirements if the works are urgent and there are no objections.

Topics

tenancy lawrepair worksconsultation requirements

Provisions

Section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985Section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

📖 What the law says

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA

This section allows a tribunal to grant a determination to dispense with consultation requirements if it is reasonable to do so. Consultation requirements refer to obligations placed on landlords to consult tenants before undertaking certain works or entering into long-term agreements.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal granted conditional dispensation to a landlord seeking to bypass consultation requirements for urgent repairs.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal granted conditional dispensation to a landlord seeking to bypass consultation requirements for urgent repairs, provided the landlord complies with certain conditions.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Case Reference

:

CHI/29UQ/LDC/2021/0044

Property

:

23-25 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Applicant: [redacted]

:

[COUNSEL]

Respondent: [redacted]

:

---

Type of Application

:

To dispense with the requirement to consult lessees about major works section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

Tribunal Member

:

Judge Dovar

Date of Determination

:

9th June 2021

DETERMINATION

2 Background

1. The Applicant seeks dispensation under Section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 from the consultation requirements imposed on the landlord by Section 20 of the 1985 Act.

2. The Applicant explains that water is entering through the patio doors at [ADDRESS] and that a [NAME] has identified the cause as being blown masonry which is in need of urgent repair.

3. The only issue for the Tribunal is whether or not it is reasonable to dispense with the statutory consultation requirements. This application does not concern the issue of whether any service charge costs will be reasonable or payable.

DIRECTIONS

4. Having considered the application the Tribunal was satisfied that the matter is urgent, it is not practicable for there to be a hearing and that it was in the interests of justice to make a decision disposing of the proceedings without a hearing (rule 6A of the Tribunal Procedure Rules 2013 as amended by The Tribunal Procedure (Coronavirus) Amendment Rules 2020 SI 2020 No 406 L11.

5. Directions were given, including a notice that the Tribunal intended to deal with the matter on the papers and inviting responses from [RESPONDENT]. Following that, three [RESPONDENT] wrote to the Tribunal confirming their consent to the application. There were no objections and no request for a hearing.

DETERMINATION

6.

In the circumstances, in light of the urgency and the lack of objection, the Tribunal grants conditional dispensation.

7. The conditions are that the Applicant is to:

• provide a copy of this determination to each leaseholder; and • a written explanation as to how they have located the contractor used to remedy the leak and what other contractors they considered; and • at the request of any leaseholder (to be made within 14 days of receipt of this determination), provide them with a copy of any estimate or invoice relating to the said works.

8. Once those conditions are fulfilled, the requirements of the statutory consultation will be waived. JUDGE DOVAR

3 Appeals

A person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) must seek permission to do so by making written application to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case.

The application must arrive at the Tribunal within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision.

If the person wishing to appeal does not comply with the 28-day time limit, the person shall include with the application for permission to appeal a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28-day time limit; the Tribunal will then decide whether to extend time or not to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed.

The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party making the application is seeking.

📊 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 tribunal was satisfied that the repair work was urgent.
  • It was not practical to hold a hearing for this matter.
  • The tribunal found it was in the interest of justice to make a decision without a hearing.
  • The lessees confirmed their consent to the application.
  • There were no objections from any of the lessees.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

It decided that the landlord could skip consulting tenants about urgent repairs, subject to certain conditions.

Who was involved?

The landlord and the leaseholders were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to grant dispensation because the repairs were urgent and there were no objections from the leaseholders.

Which laws or rules were applied?

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

What was the argument that mattered most?

The urgency of the repairs and the lack of objection from the leaseholders were the most important factors.

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 also be able to bypass consultation requirements if the repairs are urgent and there are no objections.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The surveyor's report identifying the cause of the problem and the need for urgent repair was 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 get advice from a qualified solicitor for a case 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.