AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·31 October 2023

Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Access Control Works

Case No.

📌 In brief

In this case, the First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to bypass certain consultation rules when updating an access control system urgently needed to secure a property. The decision was based on the risk of unauthorised entry if repairs were delayed.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord is entitled to seek dispensation from statutory consultation requirements if it can be shown that compliance would cause undue hardship or risk, as in this case involving compromised building security.

Topics

Landlord and Tenant ActService ChargesConsultation Requirements

Provisions

s.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985s.20ZA Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

📖 What the law says

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA

Under this section, a landlord can apply to a tribunal for permission to bypass certain consultation requirements related to building works or long-term agreements if the tribunal finds it reasonable to do so. The consultation requirements themselves are defined by regulations set by the Secretary of State.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent access control works under s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal granted dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements under s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for urgent access control works in a multi-flat building, due to compromised security.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Case reference : LON/00AW/LDC/2023/0169 Property :

[ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicants : [redacted] [COMPANY] (2) [COMPANY] : [COMPANY] Respondents : [redacted] application Representative :

Type of application : For the dispensation of some of the consultation requirements under s.20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal member :

[ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision :

13 October 2023

DECISION

2 Decision of the Tribunal The Tribunal determines that those parts of the consultation requirements provided for by s.20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 ("the Act") which have not been complied with are to be dispensed with. The application 1. The Applicants seek a determination pursuant to s.20ZA of the Act for the dispensation of all or any of the consultation requirements provided for by s.20 of the Act. The application was dated 09 June 2023.

2. Directions of the Tribunal were issued on 10 July 2023.

3. The case was listed for a paper determination. No request had been made by any of the parties for an oral hearing. The hearing 4. The matter was determined by way of a paper hearing which took place on 13 October 2023. The background 5. The premises consist of eight flats in [ADDRESS]. The application 6. The Applicant has applied for dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements in respect of updating and reinstating access control programming and installing new hardware, which is compatible with the new software. The system had malfunctioned, compromising building access for the tenants. This is why the application is said to be urgent.

7. There are two tenders in the sums of £14,391 and £15,879 each plus VAT respectively.

8. The only issue for the Tribunal is whether it is reasonable to dispense with the statutory consultation requirements. This application did not concern the issue of whether any service charge costs will be reasonable or payable.

9. No notice was received from any of the Respondents opposing the application. Decision of the tribunal 10. s.20 of the Act provides for the limitation of service charges in the event that the statutory consultation requirements are not met. The consultation requirements apply where the works are qualifying works (as in this case) and only £250 can be recovered from a tenant in respect of such works unless the consultation requirements have either been complied with or dispensed with.

3 11. Dispensation is dealt with by s.20ZA of the Act which provides:- "Where an application 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 agreement, the tribunal may make the determination if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements"

12. The Tribunal is satisfied that, in the particular circumstances of this case, involving a clear risk of entry to the property being compromised, it is reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements in respect of the installation of the new electronic equipment.

13. The Tribunal's determination is limited to this application for dispensation of consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the Act.

Name:

[NAME]: 13 October 2023

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

Allowed12 cases

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 showed that complying with the consultation requirements would compromise building security.
The malfunctioning access control system posed an urgent risk to tenants' safety.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The tribunal granted dispensation from statutory consultation requirements for urgent access control works.

Who was involved?

A landlord and leaseholders in a multi-flat building.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided that it was reasonable to bypass consultation rules due to security risks if repairs were delayed.

Which laws or rules were applied?

s.20 and s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The risk of unauthorised entry due to malfunctioning access control systems.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

For the landlord.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

A landlord may seek dispensation from consultation requirements if urgent repairs are necessary and security risks exist.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence of malfunctioning access control systems and potential security risks.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, but appeals must meet strict criteria and deadlines.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor.

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.