Tribunal Grants Urgent Repair Dispensation Without Consultation
📌 In brief
The Tribunal allowed a landlord to skip the consultation process required by law for urgent repairs to windows because the repairs were needed immediately to prevent further damage.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord may be granted dispensation from consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 if the works are deemed urgent.
📖 What the law says
Under this section, a landlord can apply to a tribunal to be exempted from certain consultation requirements related to works or long-term agreements if the tribunal finds it reasonable to grant such exemption.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for urgent repairs to windows.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for urgent repairs to windows in a property. The decision was made due to the urgent nature of the repairs and the ongoing damage caused by water ingress.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : MAN/30UF/LDC/2020/0036
Property : [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Applicants : [redacted]
Respondent: [redacted] section 20ZA Landlord & Tenant Act 1985
Tribunal Members : (Judge) [NAME]
[NAME] ([NAME])
Date : 14 12 2020
_______________________________________________
DECISION AND REASONS ____________________________________
Decision 1. The Tribunal grants dispensation from the consultation requirements of section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 under section 20ZA of that Act. The Application 2. On the 24 July 2020, the Applicant lodged an application under section 20ZA for dispensation from the consultation requirements under
section 20 in relation to qualifying works necessary on the above property.
3. The Applicant indicated that the application could be dealt with on the papers and a Tribunal convened to make a decision on that application today.
4. The application is for dispensation from consultation in relation to repairs to some of the windows at the development, which, it is claimed are faulty and in need of urgent repair.
5. The Applicant included a list of all leasehold owners of each flat and a list of their various addresses for service of the documents.
6. The Applicant included a copy of 4 quotes received from 4 contractors and a series of photographs showing the extent of the disrepair to the windows. The Law 7. The Tribunal can grant dispensation under section 20ZA in relation to qualifying works if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements set out in section 20 of the 1985 Act. Background to the Application 8. The development consists of a detached house together with a block of 13 flats. There are 13 [RESPONDENT] of the 14 properties.
9. We had a number of photographs of the state of the windows and a statement of case which [RESPONDENT] a description. Some of the window frames are rotten and allow water to ingress causing damp in several of the properties. There is a fear that this water ingress will damage the fabric of the building and lead to increased costs if works are not carried out promptly.
10. The works were stated to be necessary before August 2020 and the application was hoped to have been decided by then but as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic and listing difficulties, a decision could not be made until today.
11. The Applicant had initially commenced consultation in relation to the windows in June 2019 and it is apparent that one contractor, DPS, is significantly cheaper that other contractors and was accordingly chosen to carry out the works. Works were not started but it appears that further quotes were obtained between March 2020 and June 2020, following the lifting of Covid-19 restrictions and DPS has been chosen as the preferred contractor. No consultation has taken place in relation to these further quotes but as a result of the urgent nature of the works, dispensation has been requested. The Response of the [RESPONDENT]
12. The Respondents ([RESPONDENT]) were asked for a response following a Directions Notice sent out in September 2020. There has been no response from any Respondent indicating that they object to the making of an order. Reasons for Granting Dispensation 13. The Tribunal can grant dispensation if dispensation from the requirements to consult is reasonable.
14. We are satisfied that it is reasonable to grant dispensation due to the urgent nature of the works as water is leaking in to the apartments and causing continuing damage which will be exacerbated by a delay in having to conduct a second consultation. We note that a consultation started in relation to the works on 17 June 2019 and over the past year, various quotes have been obtained for the works. It is not entirely clear why little was done between June 2019 and the start of 2020 but given the urgent nature of the works it seems to us entirely reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirement.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Lift Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Repairs Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Asbestos Removal Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Works on Listed Building
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Urgent Lift Repairs Dispensation in First-tier Tribunal Ca…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Drainage Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Masonry Works
- 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 in Multi-Story Buildin…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Works Dispensation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Lift Repairs
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 granted dispensation because the works were urgent, with water leaking into apartments and causing damage.
- Delaying the repairs to conduct a second consultation would worsen the damage.
- The applicant had already started a consultation process in June 2019 and obtained various quotes over the past year.
- No respondent objected to the application for dispensation.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal allowed the landlord to skip the consultation process for urgent repairs to windows.
Who was involved?
The landlord and leaseholders were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant dispensation because the repairs were urgent and necessary to prevent further damage.
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 urgency of the repairs and the potential for further damage were the most important arguments.
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 also be able to skip the consultation process if the repairs are truly urgent.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Photographs of the damaged windows and quotes from contractors were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions like this can be appealed to a higher court.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.
