12 Gore Lane, Braintree,Essex CM77 6TU : CAM/21UC/LDC/2025/0627 CAM/21UC/LDC/2025/0627

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL
PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
Case No CAM/21UC/LDC/2025/0627
Between
Saffron Housing Trust Ltd.Applicant(Representative) Thomas Edward Chandler (Representative) liable to contribute at the PropertyRespondentSaffron Housing Trust Ltd. S2oZA of the Landlord and TenantLandlord
Before
N. Martindale FRICSFirst tier Tribunal (PropertyChamber) Cambridge CountyNone David John Chandler, Joan Margaret Chandler for the ApplicantNone for the RespondentDate 3 June 2025Property: Essex CM77 6TUType of application: Act 1985 - dispensation of consultation requirements
[39]In the event, the Tribunal did not receive any requests for a hearing, nordid it receive any forms in support of or objection to respondents eitherdirectly or indirectly via the bundle.10. The Tribunal determined the case on the application form and of the leaseof the Property, received from the applicant only, with copy documentssent to the leaseholder or their representative.Applicant’s Case11. The application, at box 4 confirms that the Building was a:
“…a two-bedroomed semi-detached house. It is part of Saffron Housing TrustLtd’s HOLD (Home Owmership for Lifelong Disabilities) portfolio.”12. The application at box 7 confirms that these are to be qualifying works andhad not been carried out. They are not part of a long term contract.13. At box 9 the applicant was content for paper determination and at box 10,indicated the ‘Fast Track’ preference: However no reason was given.14. The application at ‘Grounds for seeking dispensation’, box 1. stated inaddition: “…The boiler has now stopped working entirely and is beyondrepair… a full boiler replacement is required for long-term provision ofheating… The existing combination boiler will be removed and anewcombination boiler installed. The heating controls will be upgraded andreplacement radiators installed… The work is anticipated to take twodays and the quote from the approved contractor is currently £3,435.47plus VAT at 20%.. plus 10% administration fees..”15. The application at box 2. below this, described the consultation that hadbeen carried out or is proposed to be carried out. “…to dispense the fullSection 20 consultation due to the urgency of the matter and the need toreplace the sole course of heating and not water for vulnerable residentsas soon as possible. We have served the enclosed Notice of Intention andwill now send the enclosed letter to the respondents…”16. The application at box 3. below this stated: The application is “…due to theurgent need to replace the sole source of heating and hot water forresidents who are identified as vulnerable…. There is no other source ofheating or hot water at the property… The boiler has been servicedregularly and no faults identified. It was last serviced on 14th March2024 and no issues were identified with the applicant during the serviceor the gas safety inspection.”17. The applicant provided one document headed: “Description of RelevantWorks”
. It appeared to the Tribunal that the works required would all becarried out by the in-house team within the landlord’s organisation.[418]The undated document referred to the following: 1. Flush heating systemincluding all pipework and radiators. 2. Drain down existing heatingsystem and remove gas combination boiler. 3. Install new replacementcombination boiler in same location adjust pipework and electricalconnections to suit. 4. Commission and test Installation. 5. Instructoccupants. Estimated cost of the works to the property including VAT at20%. £3,435.47 + £687.09 VAT = £4,112.56. With admin fees (no VAT)the total cost would be £4,523.82.19. The landlord’s agent copied in to the Tribunal the letter to the leaseholderrespondents about the application and sent copies of the documents perthe Directions, on 7 April 2025.Respondent’s Case20. The applicant had identified the residential leaseholders of the house tothe Tribunal from whom the service charge would eventually be recoveredand had been identified as the potential respondents. The applicantconfirmed that there had been no objections from any leaseholder.21. The Tribunal did not receive any objections or other representations fromthe leaseholders, either through the applicant, or directly.The Law22. S.18 (1) of the Act provides that a service charge is an amount payable by atenant of a dwelling as part of or in addition to the rent, which is payablefor services, repairs, maintenance, improvements or insurance orlandlord’s costs of management, and the whole or part of which varies ormay vary according to the costs incurred by the landlord. S.20 providesfor the limitation of service charges in the event that the statutoryconsultation requirements are not met. The consultation requirementsapply where the works are qualifying works (as in this case) and only £250can be recovered from a tenant for such works unless consultationrequirements have either been complied with or dispensed with.23. Dispensation is dealt with by S.20 ZA of the Act which provides:-“Where an application is made to a leasehold valuation tribunalfor a determination to dispense with all or any of theconsultation requirements in relation to any qualifying worksor qualifying long term agreement, the tribunal may make thedetermination if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense withthe requirements.”[524]The consultation requirements for qualifying works under qualifying longterm agreements are set out in Schedule 3 of the Service Charges(Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003 as follows:-1(1) The landlord shall give notice in writing of his intention tocarry out qualifying works –(a) to each tenant; and(b) where a recognised tenants’ association represents someor all of the tenants, to the association.(2) The notice shall –(a) describe, in general terms, the works proposed to be carriedout or specify the place and hours at which a description of theproposed works may be inspected;(b) state the landlord’s reasons for considering it necessary tocarry out the proposed works;(c) contain a statement of the total amount of the expenditureestimated by the landlord as likely to be incurred by him on andin connection with the proposed works;(d) invite the making, in writing, of observations in relation tothe proposed works or the landlord’s estimated expenditure(e) specify-(i) the address to which such observations may be sent;(ii) that they must be delivered within the relevant period; and(iii) the period on which the relevant period ends.2(1) where a notice under paragraph 1 specifies a place and hoursfor inspection-(a) the place and hours so specified must be reasonable; and(b) a description of the proposed works must be available forinspection, free of charge, at that place and during those hours.(2) If facilities to enable copies to be taken are not made availableat the times at which the description may be inspected, thelandlord shall provide to any tenant, on request and free of charge,a copy of the description.3. Where, within the relevant period, observations are made inrelation to the proposed works or the landlord’s estimatedexpenditure by any tenant or the recognised tenants’ association,the landlord shall have regard to those observations.4. Where the landlord receives observations to which (inaccordance with paragraph 3) he is required to have regard, he 6shall, within 21 days of their receipt, by notice in writing to theperson by whom the observations were made state his response tothe observations.Tribunal’s Decision25. The scheme of the provisions is designed to protect the interests ofleaseholders and whether it is reasonable to dispense with any particularrequirements in an individual case must be considered in relation to thescheme of the provisions and its purpose.26. The Tribunal must have a cogent reason for dispensing with theconsultation requirements, the purpose of which is that leaseholders whomay ultimately pay the bill are fully aware of what works are beingproposed, the cost thereof and have the opportunity to nominatecontractors where there is no public procurement. The correspondenceshowed that the applicant complied generally with Directions.27. The terms of this Dispensation from the requirements ofSection 20, are:28. That this only covers the work set out in the application form. No otherdocuments detaili[731]In making its determination of this application, it does notconcern the issue of whether any service charge costs arereasonable or indeed payable by the leaseholders. TheTribunal’s determination is limited to this application fordispensation of consultation requirements under S20ZA of theAct; in this case, on terms.N Martindale FRICS 3 June 2025Rights of appealBy 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 appealthey may have.If either party is dissatisfied with this decision, they may apply for permission toappeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on any point of law arising fromthis Decision.Prior to making such an appeal, an application must be made, in writing, to thisTribunal for permission to appeal. Any such application must be made within 28days of the issue of this decision to the person making the application (regulation52 (2) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rule2013).If the application is not made within the 28-day time limit, such application mustinclude a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying withthe 28 day time limit; the tribunal will then look at such reason(s) and decidewhether to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed, despite notbeing within the time limit.The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of thetribunal 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 applicationis seeking.If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application forpermission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).