VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Landlord Granted Permission for Urgent Roof Repairs Without Consultation

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to skip the usual consultation process with tenants for urgent roof repairs because of a leak, as no objections were raised and no harm to tenants was identified.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord may obtain dispensation from the consultation requirements of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for urgent repairs if there are no objections and no identified prejudice to the tenants.

Topics

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985Roof RepairsConsultation Requirements

Provisions

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA

📖 What the law says

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA

The First-tier Tribunal can grant a request to skip the consultation requirements set by the Secretary of State if it finds it reasonable to do so, especially when dealing with urgent repairs like those needed due to a leak.

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

📖 Technical summary

The tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent roof repairs due to a leak.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal granted dispensation to a landlord to bypass the consultation requirements of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for urgent roof repairs due to a leak, where no objections were raised and no prejudice was identified.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Case Reference : LON/00BE/LDC/2019/0197 Property : 64 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant: [redacted] :

[APPELLANT]. Respondents :

[redacted] (2) Ms [COUNSEL] (3) Mr. [COUNSEL] & Ms [COUNSEL] : N/A Types of Application : Dispensation – section 20ZA Tribunal Members : Judge Tagliavini

Date and venue of (paper) hearing

: 13 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Date of Decision

: 13 December 2019

DECISION

2

Decisions of the tribunal

I The tribunal grants the application to dispense with the section consultation provisions of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 in respect of urgent roof repairs to remedy a leak. _________________________________________________

The application

2. This is an application made under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the Act). The applicant seeks the tribunal’s dispensation from the consultation provisions required by section 20 of the 1985 in respect of works said to be urgently required to the roof of the subject premises.

Background

3. The applicant is the freeholder of the subject premises pursuant to a lease of the First Floor Flat (with loft extension) dated 7 October 2014 made between [NAME] & [NAME] and the [NAME] and [NAME] [NAME].

The premises

4. The premises comprise three flats on the ground floor and rear garden flat, a ground floor flat and a flat on the first and second floor of a converted detached house.

The Applicant’s evidence

5. The applicant provided and relied upon a Statement of Case (undated) in support of this application. The applicant stated that it had been made aware of a leak form the roof into the first/second floor flat. The contractors [NAME] [NAME] was immediately commissioned to investigate the leak. An inspection was carried out on 28 October 2019 and a quotation for the cost of the works (including scaffolding) was provided the same day in the sum of £1290.

6. An application dated 5 November 2019 was made to the tribunal and directions were made on 11 November 2019, the tenants having been notified of the applicant’s intention to carry out the works of repair to the leaking roof and the intention to make this application to the tribunal in a letter dated 1 November 2019.

The Respondent’s evidence

6. No objection was made to this application either to the applicant or to the tribunal and no representations were received from the tenants.

3 The tribunal’s decisions and reasons

7. In the absence of any objections and the identification of any prejudice caused to the respondents, the tribunal accepts the urgent nature of these works. Therefore, in the circumstances, it considers it reasonable and appropriate to dispense with the requirements of section 20 of the 1985 Act in respect of the proposed works of repair to the leaking roof at the subject premises.

Signed: Judge Tagliavini

Dated: 13 December 2019

📊 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 seeks dispensation for urgent repairs.
  • There are no objections raised by tenants.
  • No identified prejudice to the tenants is present.
  • The works are deemed reasonable to prevent danger to tenants.
  • The landlord provides evidence showing no prejudice to tenants.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • (No factors listed as all cases favored the landlord)

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 permission to bypass the consultation process for urgent roof repairs due to a leak.

Who was involved?

The landlord and several tenants were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to allow the landlord to proceed with the repairs without consulting the tenants because the repairs were deemed urgent and necessary, and no objections were raised.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, specifically section 20ZA, was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was that the repairs were urgent and necessary, and no objections were raised by the tenants.

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 bypass the consultation process if their repairs are urgent and necessary, and no objections are raised.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence of the urgency of the repairs and the lack of objections from the tenants mattered.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to a higher court.

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.