Landlord Granted Permission to Skip Consultation for Urgent Asbestos Removal
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to skip consultation requirements for urgent asbestos removal works in a grade 2 listed building. The works were considered necessary to ensure a safe working environment for those maintaining the property.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord may be dispensed from consultation requirements if the works are urgent and necessary.
📖 What the law says
This section allows a tribunal to grant a request to waive consultation requirements if it finds it 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 the landlord's a person for dispensation from consultation requirements due to the urgency of asbestos removal works.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal granted the landlord's application for dispensation from consultation requirements for works to remove high-risk asbestos from three locations in a grade 2 listed building. The works were deemed urgent and necessary.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AW/LDC/2025/0670 Property : [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicant: [redacted] : [RESPONDENT] ([COUNSEL] [NAME]) Respondent : [redacted] attached to the [NAME] : N/A Type of [NAME] : Dispensation from consultation requirements Tribunal members :
Judge H Carr
Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of determination : 18th June 2025
DECISION
Decision of the tribunal The Tribunal determines to exercise its discretion to dispense with the consultation requirements contained in Schedule 4 to the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003. The [NAME]
2 1. On 21st February 2025 [RESPONDENT] of [RESPONDENT], on behalf of the landlord, issued an [NAME] for dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements in in respect of works to remove asbestos, categorised as high risk, from three locations at the property.
2. The property is a grade 2 listed building made up of 5 stories, 28 residential flats and 6 commercial ground/basement units. The building is of 1900s construction. The Determination 3. Directions in this [NAME] were made on 14th March 2025. The directions indicated that the matter would be heard on the papers based on written representations received. However, the directions also indicated that any party may make a request to the tribunal that a hearing be held. No such request was made and therefore this determination is made based on the written representations received. The Evidence 1. The evidence before the Tribunal indicates as follows: (i) The Applicant seeks dispensation from the consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for the following reasons: (a) On 8th November 2024, an asbestos management survey of the building was completed by [COMPANY] ([COMPANY]). (b) On 15th November 2024 [COMPANY] issued a report which revealed that asbestos had been found in three locations at Empire House. (1) Basement Boiler Room/Tank Room. [NAME] is located at the back of the building in the basement where communal pump and electrics are housed. The room is accessed by those who manage and maintain the building and its services. (2) [ADDRESS], Old Boiler room. This is the previous boiler room which still houses pipework to the communal heating system. This is accessed by those who manage the building and used for maintaining,
3 servicing of electrics, sump pump and reading electric meters. (3) Basement Old Meter Room/Voild (under pavement). This is a store room which has pipe work running through it. This is accessed by those who manage the building and used for maintaining water pipes that run through the room which serve the communal system, to the apartments. (c) The asbestos in these areas was categorised as High risk by the report which recommended the action of removal and Enviro Clean by licenced contractors. (d) The contract value for the qualifying works is £34.203 plus VAT. The chosen contractor was [NAME]. (e) On 29th November 2024 South Kensington Estate, agent for the landlord, wrote to each of the respondents informing them of the need for the works to remove the asbestos. (f) On 28th November 2024 [NAME] were instructed by [COMPANY] to carry out the works in accordance with the quote. (g) The works commenced on 2nd December 2024 and the works were completed on 5th January 2025. (h) The [NAME] for dispensation is because of the urgency of the works. The affected areas are accessed by those maintaining the property and it is essential to provide them with a safe working environment. (i) The Applicant has informed the Tribunal that there were no objections received from any of the Respondents.
The Law
4 2. The Tribunal is being asked to exercise its discretion under s.20ZA of the Act. The wording of s.20ZA is significant. Subs (1) provides ‘Where an [NAME] is made to a leasehold valuation tribunal for a determination to dispense with all or any of the consultation requirements in relation to any qualifying works or qualifying long term agreements, the tribunal may make the determination if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements’ (emphasis added). The tribunal’s decision 3. The tribunal determines to grant the [NAME]. Reasons for the tribunal’s decision 4. In the light of the evidence provided to the tribunal and in the absence of any objections from the leaseholders, the tribunal has decided that the works were urgent and necessary.
5. This determination does not concern the issue of whether any service charge costs will be reasonable or indeed payable. The Respondents are able, if it appears to them to be appropriate, to make an [NAME] under s.27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 as to reasonableness and payability.
Name: Judge H Carr Date: 18th June 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.
5 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] 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).
6 Appendix of relevant legislation
Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (as amended) Section 18 (1) In the following provisions of this Act "service charge" means an amount payable by a tenant of a dwelling as part of or in addition to the rent - (a) which is payable, directly or indirectly, for services, repairs, maintenance, improvements or insurance or the landlord's costs of management, and (b) the whole or part of which varies or may vary according to the relevant costs. (2) The relevant costs are the costs or estimated costs incurred or to be incurred by or on behalf of the landlord, or a [NAME], in connection with the matters for which the service charge is payable. (3) For this purpose - (a) "costs" includes overheads, and (b) costs are relevant costs in relation to a service charge whether they are incurred, or to be incurred, in the period for which the service charge is payable or in an earlier or later period. Section 19 (1) Relevant costs shall be taken into account in determining the amount of a service charge payable for a period - (a) only to the extent that they are reasonably incurred, and (b) where they are incurred on the provisions of services or the carrying out of works, only if the services or works are of a reasonable standard; and the amount payable shall be limited accordingly. (2) Where a service charge is payable before the relevant costs are incurred, no greater amount than is reasonable is so payable, and after the relevant costs have been incurred any necessary adjustment shall be made by repayment, reduction or subsequent charges or otherwise. Section 27A (1) An [NAME] may be made to the appropriate tribunal for a determination whether a service charge is payable and, if it is, as to - (a) the person by whom it is payable, (b) the person to whom it is payable, (c) the amount which is payable,
7 (d) the date at or by which it is payable, and (e) the manner in which it is payable. (2) Subsection (1) applies whether or not any payment has been made. (3) An [NAME] may also be made to the appropriate tribunal for a determination whether, if costs were incurred for services, repairs, maintenance, improvements, insurance or management of any specified description, a service charge would be payable for the costs and, if it would, as to - (a) the person by whom it would be payable, (b) the person to whom it would be payable, (c) the amount which would be payable, (d) the date at or by which it would be payable, and (e) the manner in which it would be payable. (4) No [NAME] under subsection (1) or (3) may be made in respect of a matter which - (a) has been agreed or admitted by the tenant, (b) has been, or is to be, referred to arbitration pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement to which the tenant is a party, (c) has been the subject of determination by a court, or (d) has been the subject of determination by an arbitral tribunal pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement. (5) But the tenant is not to be taken to have agreed or admitted any matter by reason only of having made any payment. Section 20 (1) Where this section applies to any qualifying works or qualifying long term agreement, the relevant contributions of tenants are limited in accordance with subsection (6) or (7) (or both) unless the consultation requirements have been either— (a) complied with in relation to the works or agreement, or (b) dispensed with in relation to the works or agreement by (or on appeal from) the appropriate tribunal . (2) In this section “relevant contribution”, in relation to a tenant and any works or agreement, is the amount which he may be required under the terms of his lease to contribute (by the payment of service charges) to relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works or under the agreement. (3) This section applies to qualifying works if relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works exceed an appropriate amount. (4) The Secretary of State may by regulations provide that this section applies to a qualifying long term agreement—
8 (a) if relevant costs incurred under the agreement exceed an appropriate amount, or (b) if relevant costs incurred under the agreement during a period prescribed by the regulations exceed an appropriate amount. (5) An appropriate amount is an amount set by regulations made by the Secretary of State; and the regulations may make provision for either or both of the following to be an appropriate amount— (a) an amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations, and (b) an amount which results in the relevant contribution of any one or more tenants being an amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations. (6) Where an appropriate amount is set by virtue of paragraph (a) of subsection (5), the amount of the relevant costs incurred on carrying out the works or under the agreement which may be taken into account in determining the relevant contributions of tenants is limited to the appropriate amount. (7) Where an appropriate amount is set by virtue of paragraph (b) of that subsection, the amount of the relevant contribution of the tenant, or each of the tenants, whose relevant contribution would otherwise exceed the amount prescribed by, or determined in accordance with, the regulations is limited to the amount so prescribed or determined.] Section 20B (1) If any of the relevant costs taken into account in determining the amount of any service charge were incurred more than 18 months before a demand for payment of the service charge is served on the tenant, then (subject to subsection (2)), the tenant shall not be liable to pay so much of the service charge as reflects the costs so incurred. (2) Subsection (1) shall not apply if, within the period of 18 months beginning with the date when the relevant costs in question were incurred, the tenant was notified in writing that those costs had been incurred and that he would subsequently be required under the terms of his lease to contribute to them by the payment of a service charge. Section 20C (1) A tenant may make an [NAME] for an order that all or any of the costs incurred, or to be incurred, by the landlord in connection with proceedings before a court, residential property tribunal or the Upper Tribunal, or in connection with arbitration proceedings, are
9 not to be regarded as relevant costs to be taken into account in determining the amount of any service charge payable by the tenant or any other person or persons specified in the [NAME]. (2) The [NAME] shall be made— (a) in the case of court proceedings, to the court before which the proceedings are taking place or, if the [NAME] is made after the proceedings are concluded, to a county court; (aa) in the case of proceedings before a residential property tribunal, to that tribunal; (b) in the case of proceedings before a residential property tribunal, to the tribunal before which the proceedings are taking place or, if the [NAME] is made after the proceedings are concluded, to any residential property tribunal; (c) in the case of proceedings before the Upper Tribunal, to the tribunal; (d) in the case of arbitration proceedings, to the arbitral tribunal or, if the [NAME] is made after the proceedings are concluded, to a county court. (3) The court or tribunal to which the [NAME] is made may make such order on the [NAME] as it considers just and equitable in the circumstances. Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 Schedule 11, paragraph 1 (1) In this Part of this Schedule “administration charge” means an amount payable by a tenant of a dwelling as part of or in addition to the rent which is payable, directly or indirectly— (a) for or in connection with the grant of approvals under his lease, or applications for such approvals, (b) for or in connection with the provision of information or documents by or on behalf of the landlord or a person who is party to his lease otherwise than as landlord or tenant, (c) in respect of a failure by the tenant to make a payment by the due date to the landlord or a person who is party to his lease otherwise than as landlord or tenant, or (d) in connection with a breach (or alleged breach) of a covenant or condition in his lease. (2) But an amount payable by the tenant of a dwelling the rent of which is registered under Part 4 of the Rent Act 1977 (c. 42) is not an administration charge, unless the amount registered is entered as a variable amount in pursuance of section 71(4) of that Act.
10 (3) In this Part of this Schedule “variable administration charge” means an administration charge payable by a tenant which is neither— (a) specified in his lease, nor (b) calculated in accordance with a formula specified in his lease. (4) An order amending sub-paragraph (1) may be made by the appropriate national authority. Schedule 11, paragraph 2 A variable administration charge is payable only to the extent that the amount of the charge is reasonable. Schedule 11, paragraph 5 (1) An [NAME] may be made to the appropriate tribunal for a determination whether an administration charge is payable and, if it is, as to— (a) the person by whom it is payable, (b) the person to whom it is payable, (c) the amount which is payable, (d) the date at or by which it is payable, and (e) the manner in which it is payable. (2) Sub-paragraph (1) applies whether or not any payment has been made. (3) The jurisdiction conferred on the appropriate tribunal in respect of any matter by virtue of sub-paragraph (1) is in addition to any jurisdiction of a court in respect of the matter. (4) No [NAME] under sub-paragraph (1) may be made in respect of a matter which— (a) has been agreed or admitted by the tenant, (b) has been, or is to be, referred to arbitration pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement to which the tenant is a party, (c) has been the subject of determination by a court, or (d) has been the subject of determination by an arbitral tribunal pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement. (5) But the tenant is not to be taken to have agreed or admitted any matter by reason only of having made any payment. (6) An agreement by the tenant of a dwelling (other than a post-dispute arbitration agreement) is void in so far as it purports to provide for a determination— (a) in a particular manner, or
11 (b) on particular evidence, of any question which may be the subject matter of an [NAME] under sub-paragraph (1). (1)
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Lift Repairs Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Major Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Urgent Works Dispensation Without Full Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Urgent Heating Works Dispensation Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Lift Repairs Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Roof Repairs Dispensation Without Conditi…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Roof Repairs Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
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 accepted that the asbestos removal works were urgent and necessary.
- The asbestos found in three locations at the property was categorised as high risk.
- The affected areas are accessed by those maintaining the property, requiring a safe working environment.
- No objections were received from any of the leaseholders regarding the dispensation request.
- The landlord informed the tribunal that no objections were received from any of the respondents.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The decision allowed the landlord to skip consultation requirements for urgent asbestos removal works.
Who was involved?
The landlord applied for dispensation, while leaseholders were notified but did not object.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant the application because the works were urgent and necessary to ensure a safe working environment.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1s.20ZA and the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the urgency and necessity of the asbestos removal works.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case, the landlord.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may also apply for dispensation if their works are urgent and necessary.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence included an asbestos management survey report and notifications sent to leaseholders.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal within 28 days.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving legal disputes.
