Landlord Granted Permission to Carry Out Necessary Works Without Leaseholder Consultation
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to perform necessary works to fix moisture problems and redecorate a flat without consulting the leaseholders, following the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord is entitled to dispensation from consultation under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 if the works are necessary and there is no substantial prejudice to the leaseholders.
📖 What the law says
The First-tier Tribunal can grant permission to a landlord to bypass consultation requirements if it finds it reasonable to do so, specifically regarding necessary works or long-term agreements.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal granted dispensation from consultation for necessary works to address moisture issues and redecoration costs.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal granted dispensation for the landlord to carry out necessary works addressing moisture issues and redecorating Flat D without consulting leaseholders, under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference :
LON/00AY/LDC/2025/0770
Property : 3 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [NAME] 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 : 4 November 2025
DECISION
2
Decisions of the tribunal (1) The tribunal grants the applicant the dispensation from consultation
sought in respect of the installation of a large ventilation grill on the
chimney breast at the subject property and redecoration works to Flat
D at a cost of £1,667.91. _____________________________________________________ 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 semi-detached house converted into five self-
contained flats on three floors. 3. The applicant seeks dispensation from consultation in respect of the
installation of a grille to alleviate the build-up of moisture and
redecoration works to Flat D The cost of the works is said to be in the
region of £1,667.91. 4. The respondents were subsequently notified of this [NAME] for
dispensation from consultation. The hearing 5. Neither party requested an oral hearing and therefore the tribunal
determined the [NAME] using the 47 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 remedy the ongoing
moisture/damp problem into Flat D were required and redecoration
thereafter. The tribunal is also satisfied the respondents have not
objected to the [NAME] and/or have failed to show they have been
caused any substantial prejudice by the absence of any consultation prior to the works being carried out; [COMPANY] v [NAME] [2011] EWCA Civ 38.
3 8. Therefore, the tribunal grants the dispensation form consultation sought by the applicant.
Name:
Judge Tagliavini Date: 4 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).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Rent for London Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Fire Alarm Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Appoints Manager for Property with Maintenance Issues
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs Under s.20ZA
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs Without Consulting Le…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Fair Rent for Tenancy Under Rent Act 1977
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Orders Remedial Works for Building Safety Issues
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Drainage Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Tenancy Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Approves Emergency Building Repairs Without Leaseholder…
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 works were necessary to fix the moisture and damp problem in Flat D.
- The leaseholders did not object to the application for dispensation.
- The leaseholders failed to demonstrate any significant harm 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?
It decided to grant the landlord dispensation from consulting the leaseholders before carrying out necessary works to address moisture issues and redecorate Flat D.
Who was involved?
The landlord and leaseholders were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant dispensation because the works were necessary and there was no substantial prejudice to the leaseholders.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1bk95 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the works were necessary and there was no substantial prejudice to the leaseholders.
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 obtain dispensation from consulting leaseholders if the works are necessary and there is no substantial prejudice.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence showing the necessity of the works and the lack of substantial prejudice to the leaseholders mattered.
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.
