Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Structural Works

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00BK/LDC/2019/0196 Property :

87 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Applicant : [redacted] Respondents :

[redacted] per the [NAME] of [NAME] :

To dispense with the requirement to consult [NAME] about major works

Tribunal members :

Judge P [NAME] of decision : 16th January 2020

DECISION

2 Decision of the tribunal

(1) The tribunal dispenses with the consultation requirements in respect of the qualifying works which are the subject of this [NAME] to the extent that they have not already been complied with. (2) No cost applications have been made. The [NAME]

1. The Applicant seeks dispensation under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the 1985 Act”) from the consultation requirements imposed on the landlord and/or management company by section 20 of the 1985 Act in relation to certain qualifying works, to the extent that those requirements have not already been complied with. The works have already been carried out. 2. [NAME] is a converted block comprising 7 flats in total. The [NAME] concerns qualifying works to install bracing (noggins) between and in the middle of the joists and additional fixing bolts along the length of the timber joists, with the loose brickwork to be carefully removed and the relevant wall to be reinstated properly mortar-bonded and pointed.

3. The Applicant is the management company under the long leases of the individual flats within [NAME]. Paper determination 4. In its [NAME] the Applicant stated that it would be content with a paper determination if the tribunal considered it appropriate. In its directions the tribunal allocated the case to the paper track (i.e. without an oral hearing) but noted that any party had the right to request an oral hearing. No party has requested an oral hearing and therefore this matter is being dealt with on the papers alone. Applicant’s case 5. The Applicant states that SAABCO were instructed by the leaseholder of Flat 6 to carry out some internal renovation works. In the process of commencing these works they discovered that the support timber joists had become twisted and that some of the brickwork on a supporting wall needed re-bedding.

6. SAABCO reported these concerns, as a result of which the Applicant commissioned [APPELLANT] to carry out an urgent structural survey. [NAME] recommended installing bracing (noggins)

3 between and in the middle of the joists and adding additional fixing bolts along the length of the timber joists, with the loose brickwork to be carefully removed and the supporting wall to be reinstated properly mortar-bonded and pointed.

7. The Applicant adds that the above works needed to be carried out urgently in order to provide adequate support to the building and to avoid costly delays to the internal renovation work.

8. Two contractors were approached for quotes, and SAABCO recommended going with the cheaper quote of £7,860. The works were carried out on 15th October 2019. [NAME] were provided with constant updates in relation to the works.

9. The Applicant has included a copy of [APPELLANT] in the bundle of documents supplied to the tribunal. It has also confirmed that it has provided a copy of its [NAME] and of the tribunal’s directions to all of the Respondents. Responses from the Respondents 10. None of the Respondents has opposed the [NAME] or made any other representations. The relevant legal provisions 11. Under Section 20(1) of the 1985 Act, in relation to any qualifying works “the relevant contributions of tenants are limited … unless the consultation requirements have been either (a) complied with … or (b) dispensed with … by … the appropriate tribunal”.

12. Under Section 20ZA(1) of the 1985 Act “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…, the tribunal may make the determination if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements”. Tribunal’s decision 13. The tribunal notes the Applicant’s stated rationale for applying for dispensation. Whilst we do not get a sense from the structural survey report that there was necessarily any imminent danger to residents or of structural collapse, we accept on the basis of the evidence provided that it was in all parties’ interests to minimise delay to the works.

14. As regards the steps taken by the Applicant to comply with the consultation requirements to the extent reasonably possible, we note

4 that it obtained a report from a chartered surveyor and acted on his recommendations, it obtained two quotes and communicated with [NAME] in relation to the works.

15. The Applicant has complied with the tribunal’s directions, and – importantly – none of the Respondents has opposed the [NAME]. In addition, there is also no evidence before us that any of the Respondents has been prejudiced by the failure to consult fully.

16. Therefore, for the above reasons, we are satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the formal consultation requirements in respect of the qualifying works which are the subject of this [NAME] to the extent that those requirements have not already been complied with.

17. For the avoidance of doubt, this determination is confined to the issue of consultation and does not constitute a decision on the reasonableness of the cost of the works.

Name: Judge P Korn Date: 16th January 2020

RIGHTS OF APPEAL

A. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) a written [NAME] for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the regional office dealing with the case.

B. 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].

C. If the [NAME] is not made within the 28 day time limit, such [NAME] must include a request for extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28 day time limit; the Tribunal will then look at such reason and decide whether to allow the [NAME] for permission to appeal to proceed despite not being within the time limit.

D. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates (i.e. give the date, [NAME] and the case number), state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking.