Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Works on Residential Estate
📌 In brief
The tribunal allowed a landlord to bypass certain consultation requirements for repairing and redecorating parts of a residential estate because the tenants were informed and did not raise objections.
⚖️ Legal holding
An applicant is entitled to dispensation from consultation requirements if a person have been made aware of the application and have not objected to it.
📖 What the law says
The appropriate tribunal can grant dispensation from consultation requirements if it determines that it is reasonable to do so. The consultation requirements refer to obligations placed on landlords to consult tenants regarding proposed works or agreements.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for certain works on a residential estate.
📜 Headnote Official document
The tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for paving and masonry repairs on a residential estate, finding leaseholders were made aware and did not object to the application.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference :
LON/00AM/LDC/2025/0837
Property : [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : [APPELLANT]: [COUNSEL] Respondents : [redacted] estate as listed in the schedule attached to this application. Representative : N/A Type of application : Dispensation for consultation – s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Tribunal member : Judge Tagliavini Venue : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 8 December 2025
DECISION
2 Decisions of the tribunal (1) The tribunal grants the applicant the dispensation from statutory
consultation sought in respect of paving and masonry repairs across
common external area of the estate, re-tarmacking to existing area and
painting/re-decoration of previously painted elements of the estate. _____________________________________________________ The application 1. The applicant seeks dispensation from the statutory consultation
requirements pursuant to s.20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
and as specified in the Final Certificate dated 6 May 2025. The background 2. The subject estate (or part) comprises 7 blocks of 1 to 3 bedroom flats
built in the 1970’s. 3. The applicant seeks dispensation from consultation in respect of works
to paving and for masonry repairs across common external area of the
estate, in addition to re-tarmacking to existing area and the painting/re-
decoration of previously painted elements of the estate. A Notice of
Intention was served on all [NAME] on 15 February 2023 and was
followed by a letter dated 6 February 2024 advising [NAME] that the
specified works would commence on 4 March 2024. However, due to an
administrative error, a Statement of Estimates was not sent to the
[NAME] until 12 August 2025 and after the specified works had been
carried out. 4. These works formed Phase 3 of a large program of works that was
carried out on the subject estate. The hearing 5. Neither party requested an oral hearing and therefore the tribunal
determined the application using the 117 digital bundle provided by the
applicant. 6. The applicant confirmed to the tribunal by email dated 6 October 2025
that all [NAME] had been `served with a copy of the application
and accompanying information as well as the tribunal’s directions.
3 The decision and reasons 7. The tribunal is satisfied that the respondent [NAME] have been
made aware of this application. The tribunal also finds the respondent
did not notify the applicant of any objection to this application as per the
email to the tribunal dated 5 November 2025. 8. The tribunal accepts that the error in completing the s.20 consultation
process for these specified works was due to an administrative error at
the final stages. The tribunal finds the [NAME] were however,
provided with an opportunity to respond to the Notice Intention
and state any objection to these works but did not do so. The tribunal is
also satisfied the respondents have not objected to this application and
therefore have failed to show they have been caused any substantial
prejudice by the absence of any consultation prior to the works
being carried out; [COMPANY] v [NAME]
[2011] EWCA Civ 38. 8. Therefore, the tribunal grants the dispensation from consultation sought
by the applicant in respect of paving and masonry repairs across
painting/re-decoration of previously painted elements of the estate.
Name:
Judge Tagliavini Date: 7 December 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 a party wishes to appeal 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 should be made on Form RP PTA available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-rp-pta-application-for- permission-to-appeal-a-decision-to-the-upper-tribunal-lands-chamber
4 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 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).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 10 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Reduces Financial Penalty to £500
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) RTM Company Granted Dispensation for Urgent Electrical Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Management Company Allowed Urgent Lift Repairs Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rules on Lease Breaches
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Halts Market Rent Determination Until Valid Notice Confirmed
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment for Assured Tenancy: First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Service Charge Limitation Ruling by First-tier Tribunal
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 tribunal was satisfied that the residents were made aware of the application.
- The residents did not notify the applicant or the tribunal of any objection to the application.
- The error in the consultation process was due to an administrative error at the final stages.
- The residents were given a chance to object to the works but did not do so.
- The residents failed to show they were substantially harmed by the lack of prior consultation.
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 certain works on a residential estate.
Who was involved?
The landlord of a residential estate and the leaseholders of the estate.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the landlord could bypass the consultation requirements because the leaseholders were informed and did not object.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, specifically section 20ZA.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that the leaseholders were made aware of the application and did not object to it.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the landlord.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation might be able to obtain dispensation from consultation requirements if they ensure leaseholders are informed and do not object.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence that the leaseholders were informed and did not object to the application.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases like this.
