Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Security Works

OUTCOME: Allowed

1

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : CAM/00MC/LDC/2025/0664 Property : [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant: [redacted]

[NAME]) [APPELLANT] : [COMPANY] (Agent) Respondents :

[redacted] contribute at the Property

Representative : None Landlord : [NAME]) [RESPONDENT] of Application :

S2oZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 - dispensation of consultation requirements

Tribunal : N. [NAME] :

First tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Date of Decision : 3 November 2025 DECISION

2 Decision

1. The Tribunal grants dispensation from the requirements on the applicant to consult all [NAME] under S.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, in respect of the qualifying works referred to.

2. At the date of application it was stated that construction work had not yet started, though it later appeared that some preparatory electrical work had been invoiced and may have been completed at that time. It was understood that the applicant’s agent acting for the landlord, was able to recharge costs under the service charge provisions to all [NAME] in the Property.

Background

3. The application refers to work to the shutters affecting more than one shared stairwells at the Property. The applicant is the management company and freeholder. It applied to the Tribunal under [POSTCODE] of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the Act”) for the dispensation from all or any of the consultation requirements under S.20 of the Act, of [NAME] of related dwellings, who might be liable for service charge contributions arising.

4. It appeared to concern urgent works to apparently defective parts of the common areas at the Property for the benefit of the leasehold flats at the Property.

Directions

5. Directions dated 24 September 2025 were issued without an oral hearing by Judge Wyatt. They identified that the respondents were the [NAME] of the various dwellings – flats at the Property. The Directions provided for the Tribunal to determine the application on or after 3 November 2025, unless a party applied by 17 October 2025 for a hearing.

6. The applicant was to send to each of the [NAME] of the dwellings at the Property at least; a copy of the application form, brief description of the works, an estimate of the costs of the works including any professional fees and VAT and anything else relied upon, with a copy of the Directions.

7. The applicant was to file with the Tribunal a letter by 3 October 2025, confirming how and when it had been done.

8. [NAME] who objected to the application were to send a reply form and statement to the Tribunal and applicant, by 17 October 2025. The applicant was to prepare a bundle of documents including the application

3 form, Directions, sample lease and all other documents on which they wanted to rely; all responses from [NAME], a certificate of compliance referred to above; with two copies to the Tribunal and one to each respondent leaseholder.

9. In the event, the Tribunal did not receive any requests for a hearing, nor did it receive any forms in support of or objection to respondents either directly or indirectly via the bundle.

10. The Tribunal determined the case on the bundle received from the applicant, only.

Applicant’s Case

11. The application, dated 22 August 2025, at box 4 appears to confirm that the Property is 4 adjoining blocks of flats. Although the number of units is not given in the form, from other documents it appears to be 15No.

12. The application at box 7 confirms that these are to be qualifying works, but that they had not been started. They are not part of a long term contract. At box 9 the applicant was content for paper determination and applied for it, at box 10, to be dealt with by [NAME] because: “The shutter is currently not functional posing a security risk to the property, several cars have been broken into in the past few weeks.”

13. The application at ‘Grounds for seeking dispensation’, box 1. stated in addition: “The full shutter system is in need of replacement, full details of the works are noted on the CASS.”

14. The application at box 2. below this, described the consultation that had been carried out or is proposed to be carried out. “The [NAME] were advised of the need for dispensation 22nd August 2025. Two quotes have been received (attached) which the [NAME] now have a copy of. The directors have agreed for Alba to submit an application.” (Alba is the block managing agent for the applicant).

15. The application at box 3. explained why they sought dispensation of all or any of the consultation requirements. “There is an ongoing security risk which can only be remedied with a functionable shutter system.”

16. A copy of the completed lease dated 15 April 1981, of the Property between the then freeholder [COMPANY]. and the leaseholder of the whole, [NAME]) [COMPANY]. is provided. However a sample of a lease of a dwelling in the Property showing the means of recharge and recovery on [NAME] is not provided.

4 17. The applicant included a letter dated 26 August 2025 to all [NAME] confirming the decision by the landlord’s directors to apply to the Tribunal for dispensation from the S.20 Consultation process ‘…in relation to the replacement shutter system.” It outlines the requirements to do so, or the management company would face a recovery cap of £250 per leaseholder.

18. A quotation from [NAME] dated 11 August 2025 (valid for a calendar month) was also included. It referred to “SeceuroDoor 75 20g Industrial Motor Shutter - Y750”, at a price of £5,986.00 plus VAT. It appeared to be for the supply and fitting of such a new powered shutter/ door, frame and tracks, at the Property.

19. An invoice from [COMPANY] dated 26 September 2025 ref. No.2526231 was also included. It referred to work at Caxton House, [ADDRESS] for: “Install cabling off of existing meter tails to new consumer unit. Install new consumer unit with RCBO protection. Install new SWA cabling run surface. Install 16a 5 pins socket for new door.” It appeared to be for the completion of works for the provision of a power supply for the new door, to be fitted.

20. The applicant included a list of names and addresses of [NAME] names affected by the expenditure and confirmed what they had sent to all of these potential respondents. However they did not set out the mechanism for recharge within a sample of the lease of the Property to an individual leaseholder.

Respondent’s Case

21. The applicant confirmed that the respondent [NAME] had been sent the documents specified by the Tribunal in its earlier Directions.

22. The Tribunal did not receive any objections or other representations from the [NAME], either through the applicant, or directly.

The Law

23. S.18 (1) of the Act provides that a service charge is an amount payable by a tenant of a dwelling as part of or in addition to the rent, which is payable for services, repairs, maintenance, improvements or insurance or landlord’s costs of management, and the whole or part of which varies or may vary according to the costs incurred by the landlord. S.20 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

5 with. For long term contracts, the cap on contributions from [NAME] is £100 per annum.

24. Dispensation is dealt with by S.20 ZA 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.”

25. Dispensation is dealt with by S.20 ZA 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.”

26. The consultation requirements for qualifying works under qualifying long term agreements are set out in detail at Schedule 3 of the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003.

27. The consultation requirements for qualifying works for which public notice is not required are set out in detail at Schedule 4 of the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003.

Tribunal’s Decision

28. The scheme of the provisions is designed to protect the interests of [NAME] and whether it is reasonable to dispense with any particular requirements in an individual case must be considered in relation to the scheme of the provisions and its purpose.

29. The Tribunal must have a cogent reason for dispensing with the consultation requirements, the purpose of which is that [NAME] who may ultimately pay the bill are fully aware of what works are being proposed, the cost thereof and have the opportunity to nominate contractors where there is no public procurement.

30. The correspondence showed that the applicant generally complied with the Directions.

31. The terms of this Dispensation from the requirements of Section 20, are:

6 32. That this covers the work set out in the single quotation above from the selected contractor at their fixed price as received by the applicant and sent to the Tribunal. It also covers the electrical work set out in the invoice for the preparatory work at the Property. No dispensation for any prior report, nor ancillary work before or after whichever quote or estimate is accepted by the applicant, is included in this dispensation. This remains subject to subsequent challenge by any respondent leaseholder, both of the item itself and/or the amount reasonably payable, in the usual way. Other than this no other items are included given dispensation because they were not specifically sought. Those other costs including any professional fees associated with the work will be subject to the annual cap of £250 per leaseholder for a contract for works rechargeable under a service charge or to a further application for dispensation if required. This is because they do not form part of this application for dispensation.

33. The applicant will meet all of its costs arising from the making and determination of this application. However these costs can be recovered from any leaseholder as service charge and/ or as an administrative charge if the lease of each unit allows for it, subject to the usual scope for leaseholder challenge to its reasonableness and payability.

34. In making its determination of this application, it does not concern the issue of whether any service charge costs are reasonable or indeed payable by the [NAME]. The Tribunal’s determination is limited to this application for dispensation of consultation requirements under [POSTCODE] of the Act; in this case, on terms.

[NAME]

3 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 either party is dissatisfied with this decision, they may apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on any point of law arising from this Decision.

7 Prior to making such an appeal, an application must be made, in writing, to this Tribunal for permission to appeal. Any such application must be made within 28 days of the issue of this decision to the person making the application (regulation 52 (2) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rule 2013).

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 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.

If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).