Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Fire Safety Works
📌 In brief
The Tribunal granted permission to a landlord to bypass certain consultation requirements for urgent fire safety works. The works involved replacing an old electrical intake cupboard and installing a new lockable cabinet. The Tribunal found the works urgent and reasonable, allowing the landlord to proceed without further consultation.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord may be granted dispensation from consultation requirements if the works are urgent and reasonable.
📖 What the law says
The appropriate tribunal can grant dispensation from consultation requirements related to qualifying works if it determines that it is reasonable to do so.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent works.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for urgent fire safety works. The works included replacing an old electrical intake cupboard and installing a custom-made lockable cabinet. The Tribunal found the works urgent and reasonable, granting dispensation unconditionally.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00AN/LDC/2020/0081 Property : 157 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] HMCTS code : P: PAPERREMOTE Applicant: [redacted] : Mr [COUNSEL], [COMPANY], Darlington Respondents :
[redacted] Mrs [COUNSEL] (2) Mr [COUNSEL] (3) Mr [COUNSEL] (4)
Representative : None Type of Application : Dispensation from consultation requirements under section 20ZA Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the Act”)
Tribunal Member :
Mr [NAME] Chairman
Date of Decision : 23 April 2021
Determination by Written Representations
DECISION
2
Covid-19 pandemic: description of determination This has been a remote determination on the papers which has been not objected to by the parties. The form of remote determination was by paper P: PAPERREMOTE. A face-to-face hearing was not held because it was not practicable, and no-one requested the same. The documents which the tribunal considered were in electronic form totalling 68 pages.
Decision
1. The application for dispensation is GRANTED unconditionally.
Reasons
Background
2. Application to the Tribunal was made on 23 April 2020 for a dispensation from the consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the Act”) (set out in the appendix). The subject matter is replacement of an old electrical intake cupboard and the supply and fit of a custom-made fully compliant lockable cabinet, following a fire risk assessment. The works have been completed.
3. Directions were issued on 21 July 2020 that the matter be dealt with by written representations unless any party made a request for an oral hearing, which none did. The directions required the applicant to give publicity to the application and serve copies on the lessees, evidence of which has been supplied. In addition, the respondents were invited to respond to the application, which none have. The Tribunal did not consider it necessary or proportionate inspect the property.
The Property
4. The property is a described as a house converted into four flats.
The Respondents’ leases
5. Copies of leases were supplied but the Tribunal makes no finding as to payability or reasonableness of the costs to be incurred in this application.
The Applicant’s Case and Nature of the Works
6. The basis of the application is that following a fire risk assessment replacement of an old electrical intake cupboard and the supply and fit of a custom-made fully compliant lockable cabinet was required. The works have been completed and were carried out under a previous property manager. A paid invoice from [COMPANY] (invoice number 935) dated 20 February 2020 for £2,626 was supplied.
3
The Respondents’ Case
7. The respondents did not respond to the application.
The Law
8. Section 20ZA is set out in the appendix to this decision. The Tribunal has discretion to grant dispensation when it considers it reasonable to do so. In addition, the Supreme Court Judgment in [COMPANY] v [NAME] and Others [2013] UKSC 14 empowers the Tribunal to grant dispensation on terms or subject to conditions.
Findings
9. The Tribunal considers that the works were urgent, and that the applicant has acted reasonably in seeking the dispensation sought. The Tribunal does not consider that any respondent will be prejudiced by the grant of dispensation. The Tribunal therefore grants dispensation in respect of the works and invoice from [COMPANY] (invoice number 935) dated 20 February 2020 for £2,626 as referred to above.
10. This application does not concern the issue of whether any service charge costs will be reasonable or payable. The leaseholders will continue to enjoy the protection of section 27A of the Act.
C Norman FRICS
Valuer Chairman
23 April 2021
ANNEX - RIGHTS OF APPEAL
• The Tribunal is required to set out rights of appeal against its decisions by virtue of the rule 36 (2)(c) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal)(Property Chamber) Rules 2013 and these are set out below.
• If a party wishes to appeal against this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) then a written application for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case.
• The application for permission to appeal must arrive at the Regional office within 28 days after the Tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the person making the application.
• If the application is not made within the 28-day time limit, such application 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 application for permission to appeal to proceed despite not being within the time limit.
• The application 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 making the application is seeking.
5
Appendix
Section 20ZA Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (1)Where an application 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. (2)In section 20 and this section— “qualifying works” means works on a building or any other premises, and “qualifying long term agreement” means (subject to subsection (3)) an agreement entered into, by or on behalf of the landlord or a [NAME], for a term of more than twelve months. (3)The Secretary of State may by regulations provide that an agreement is not a qualifying long term agreement— (a)if it is an agreement of a description prescribed by the regulations, or (b)in any circumstances so prescribed. (4)In section 20 and this section “the consultation requirements” means requirements prescribed by regulations made by the Secretary of State. (5)Regulations under subsection (4) may in particular include provision requiring the landlord— (a)to provide details of proposed works or agreements to tenants or the recognised tenants’ association representing them, (b)to obtain estimates for proposed works or agreements, (c)to invite tenants or the recognised tenants’ association to propose the names of persons from whom the landlord should try to obtain other estimates, (d)to have regard to observations made by tenants or the recognised tenants’ association in relation to proposed works or agreements and estimates, and (e)to give reasons in prescribed circumstances for carrying out works or entering into agreements. (6)Regulations under section 20 or this section— (a)may make provision generally or only in relation to specific cases, and
6
(b)may make different provision for different purposes. (7)Regulations under section 20 or this section shall be made by statutory instrument which shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Repairs Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Repairs Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Unconditional Dispensation Granted for Urgent Water Ingress Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Unconditional Dispensation for Urgent Water Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Unconditional Dispensation for Urgent Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Unconditional Dispensation for Urgent Pigeon Infestation Wo…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Lift Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Dispensation Granted for Urgent Works Without Consultation
- 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 at Grimshaw…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Rent for Property
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 works are urgent.
- The works are necessary.
- The works are reasonable.
- The works are deemed urgent and reasonable.
- The works are deemed urgent.
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 consultation requirements for urgent fire safety works.
Who was involved?
The landlord applied for dispensation, while the tenants did not respond to the application.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant dispensation because the works were urgent and reasonable, and no tenant would be prejudiced.
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 works were urgent and had been completed under a previous property manager.
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 receive dispensation if their works are urgent and reasonable.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence included a paid invoice for the works and a fire risk assessment report.
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 recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for a case like this.
