Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs Without Consultation
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to carry out urgent roof repairs without consulting tenants because the repairs were necessary to fix water leaks in a flat. The court found that the work was urgent and would not cause harm to the tenants.
⚖️ 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 there is no identified prejudice to tenants.
📖 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 making changes.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal granted dispensation to the landlord from consulting tenants due to urgent roof repairs.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal granted dispensation to a landlord from consulting tenants for urgent roof repairs to prevent water ingress into a flat. The tribunal considered the urgent nature of the works and the lack of identified prejudice to tenants.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AU/LDC/2025/0757 Property : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [NAME] Respondent : [redacted] [NAME] : N/A Type of [NAME] : S.20ZA Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 – dispensation from consultation Tribunal member : Judge Tagliavini Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 27 August 2025
DECISION
2 The tribunal’s decision (1) The tribunal grants the applicant the dispensation sought in respect
of all works required in respect of the roof repairs that were carried out
to remedy the ingress of water into Flat 4 at the property known as 10
[ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
The [NAME] 1. The applicant has applied for dispensation pursuant to s.20ZA of the
Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 from the statutory consultation
requirements in respect of the roof repairs required to remedy the
ingress of water into Flat 4 at the property known as 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] (‘the property’).
Background
2. The property was originally a semi-detached house constructed circa
1870 that has since been converted into four self-contained flats
constructed over basement, ground and three upper floors with Flat 1
located over the basement level and having its own front door accessed
along the left hand elevation by way of a secured gate; the remaining
three flats are accessed through a central staircase.
The hearing
4. Neither party requested an oral hearing and the determination was made
by the tribunal using the digital bundle of 55 pages provided by the
applicant.
5. The applicant confirmed that a copy of the [NAME] and the tribunal’s
directions had been provided individually to the respondents by email
and by being left in the communal area However, no representations
were received from the respondents objecting to the [NAME].
6. The applicant provided a number of invoices dated variously in May
2025 from [NAME] showing the nature and extent of the work
carried out. Further invoices included the provision and cost of
scaffolding required for access to the roof which was provided by [NAME].
3 The tribunal’s reasons
9. In the absence of any objection to the [NAME], the urgent nature
of the works, and the absence of any identified prejudice caused to the
respondents, the tribunal considers it appropriate to grant the
dispensation sought in respect of all roof works required to remedy the
ingress of water in to Flat 4; [COMPANY] v Benson
and others [2013] UKSC 14 & [2013] UKSC 54.
Name: Judge Tagliavini
Date: 27 August 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).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 11 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Fire Alarm Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Balcony Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Rent for London Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Fair Rent for Tenancy Property
- 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 Pipe Replacement 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 landlord's request because no one objected to the application.
- The works were urgent, which supported granting the dispensation.
- The tribunal found no harm was caused to the tenants by the works.
- The landlord provided invoices showing the work done and its cost.
- The landlord confirmed the application and directions were sent to the tenants.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The court allowed the landlord to carry out urgent roof repairs without consulting tenants.
Who was involved?
The landlord and the tenants of the building were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the landlord could proceed with the repairs without consulting tenants because the work was urgent and would not cause harm to the tenants.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The court applied s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The urgency of the repairs and the lack of identified prejudice to tenants were the most important arguments.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the landlord 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 from consultation requirements if their work is urgent and there is no identified prejudice to tenants.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Invoices for the repair work and the nature and extent of the 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.
