Landlord Wins Urgent Roof Repairs Case Without Consultation

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AW/LDC/2024/0092 Property : [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [COUNSEL] ([COUNSEL]) Respondents :

[redacted] : Dispensation with Consultation Requirements under section 20ZA Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal member :

Judge Robert Latham

Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 26 July 2024

DECISION

The Tribunal grants this [NAME] to dispense retrospectively with the consultation requirements imposed by section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 without condition in respect of urgent works to repair the roof to prevent water penetration.

2 The [NAME]

1. By an [NAME], dated 26 March 2024, the Applicant applies for retrospective dispensation from the statutory duty to consult in respect of urgent works to repair the roof to prevent water penetration.

2. The Property is a purpose built bock of eight residential flats. There are several commercial tenants at ground floor/basement levels. The [NAME] relates to the roof above the [NAME]. Water has been leaking into the shop premises, putting valuable merchandise at risk. In September 2023, the Applicant obtained a Defect Analysis Report from [NAME] which recommended further investigations to ascertain the cause of the leaks. On 7 March 2024, the Applicant serve a Notice of Intention in respect of the roof repairs and associated works that were proposed. The Applicant considered that the further steps of serving a Notice of Estimates would cause unacceptable delays in executing the urgent works that were required. The Applicant has obtained an estimate for the works in the some £8k + VAT. The works are to be funded from reserves. It would seem that the works have now been executed. The Tribunal has not been informed of the final cost of these works.

3. On 3 June 2024, the Tribunal issued Directions. The Directions stated that the Tribunal would determine the [NAME] on the papers, unless any party requested an oral hearing. No party has done so.

4. By 17 June 2024, the Applicant was directed to send to the leaseholders by email, hand delivery or first-class post: (i) copies of the [NAME] form (excluding any list of respondents’ names and addresses) unless already sent by the applicant to the leaseholder/sublessee; (ii) if not already provided in the [NAME], a brief statement to explain the reasons for the [NAME]; and (iii) the directions. The Applicant was further directed to display a copy of these in a prominent place in the common parts of the property. On 14 June, the Applicant confirmed that it had comp0lied with this Direction.

5. By 1 July 2024, any leaseholder who opposed the [NAME] was directed to complete a Reply Form which was attached to the Directions and send it both to the Tribunal and to the Applicant. The leaseholder was further directed to send the Applicant a statement in response to the [NAME]. No leaseholder has returned a completed Reply Form opposing the [NAME].

6. The Applicant has provided a Bundle of Documents (125 pages) in support of the [NAME]. It has also provided a copy of the lease for the Ground Floor Shop and Basement. It has not provided a copy of the leases for the residential flats.

3 7. Section 20ZA (1) of the Act provides: “Where an [NAME] is made to the appropriate tribunal for a determination to dispense with all or any of the consultation requirements in relation to any qualifying works or qualifying long term agreement, the tribunal may make the determination if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements.”

8. The only issue which this Tribunal has been required to determine is whether or not it is reasonable to dispense with the statutory consultation requirements. This [NAME] does not concern the issue of whether any service charge costs will be reasonable or payable.

9. The Tribunal is satisfied that it is reasonable to grant retrospective dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements. This is justified by the urgent need for the works. There is no suggestion that any prejudice has arisen. In the circumstances, it is appropriate to grant dispensation without any conditions.

10. The Directions make provision for the service of the Tribunal’s decision. The Tribunal will email a copy of its decision to the Applicant. The Applicant is responsible for serving a copy of the Tribunal’s decision on the Respondents. Judge Robert Latham 26 July 2024

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 by e-mail 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

4 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).