The Music Box, 235, 237 & 241 Union Street London, SE1 0LR LON/00BE/LDC/2025/0754

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL

PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Case No LON/00BE/LDC/2025/0754

Between

Union Street Southwark Management Company LtdApplicant

Leaseholders of The Music Box, 235, 237 & 241 Union Street London, SE1 0LRRespondent

Before

Ms S Beckwith MRICS

Savills UK Ltd for the Applicant

N/A Dispensation pursuant to Section 20ZA for the Respondent

Venue 10 Alfred Place, London WC1E 7LR

Date 5 September 2025

Property: Street London, SE1 0LR Union Street Southwark Management

Type of application: of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

DECISION

[1]The Tribunal determines to exercise its discretion to dispense with the consultation requirements provided by Section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The Application

[2]Savills UK Ltd applied on behalf of the Applicant on 30 April 2025 under Section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (the Act), for dispensation from the consultation requirements provided for by Section 20 of the Act.

[3]The application indicated that the subject of the dispensation application was in relation to supplying and installing a new control panel to the fire damper system and associated works at the Property.

[4]The application explained that the reason that dispensation was sought was because the fire dampers have failed in the closed position preventing fresh air supply to the Property. This is causing elevated carbon dioxide levels. Procedure

[5]The Tribunal issued directions on 24 June 2025.

[6]In those directions the Tribunal set out that the matter would be determined on the basis of the papers provided in the week commencing 1 September 2025.

[7]The directions gave an opportunity for the Respondents to request a hearing. No hearing was requested so the matter has proceeded based on the papers provided for the Tribunal.

[8]The directions also provided an opportunity for the Respondents to provide a statement objecting to the application. No responses were received by the Tribunal.

[9]The Tribunal has considered the written bundle of 178 pages, in support of the application. 3 Determination The Background

[10]No description of the Property was included in the application, however, it appears to be a standalone purpose-built development with commercial use on the lower floors, with 41 flats on the floors above. The Applicant is the Residents Management Company.

[11]As set out in the Tribunal’s directions, Section 20 consultation is not required or relevant in connection with non-residential premises and the findings of the Tribunal will not affect commercial occupiers in the Property, as the jurisdiction of the Tribunal does not extend to commercial premises.

[12]The evidence and submissions of the Applicant is as follows: i. The application is for an unconditional dispensation of the consultation requirements prescribed under Section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 in relation to works to replace the fire damper panel. ii. Correspondence from Savills’ Asset Engineering team outlining the investigation of the issue and proposed solution. iii. Quotations from two companies in the amounts of £10,862.50 +VAT and £8,394.10 +VAT in respect of the required works. iv. Confirmation that a Section 20 consultation process was started, but could not be fully completed due to the urgency of the works. v. A chain of correspondence with one leaseholder, notifying them of the Section 20ZA application and answering questions about one of the proposed suppliers. The leaseholder states that they are not opposing the appointment of the proposed supplier.

[13]In accordance with Tribunal directions, the Applicant notified leaseholders of the Section 20ZA application, including how to respond. No responses from leaseholders were received by the Tribunal. The Applicant has also confirmed that it received no objections. The Law

[14]The Tribunal is being asked to exercise its discretion under Section 20ZA of the Act. The wording of Section 20ZA, subsection (1) provides: 4 ‘Where an application is made to a leasehold valuation tribunal for determination to dispense with all or any of the consultation requirements in relation to any qualifying works or qualifying long term agreements, the tribunal may make the determination if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements’.

[15]The Supreme Court in the case of Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson

[2013] UKSC 14 (Daejan)

is the leading authority on how the statutory provisions are to be interpreted. The Tribunal’s Decision

[16]The Tribunal determines to grant the application. Reasons for the Tribunal’s Decision

[17]The statement from the Applicant explains the reasons the works needed to be actioned quickly without the time afforded by a full Section 20 consultation.

[18]No objections were received from leaseholders.

[19]The Tribunal therefore determines that it is reasonable to grant the application sought.

[20]Both parties should note that this determination does not concern the issue of whether the service charge costs demanded in connection with the works to the fire damper system are reasonable or indeed payable. The Respondents are able, if it appears to them to be appropriate, to make an application under Section 27A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 as to reasonableness and payability. Name: S Beckwith MRICS Date: 5 September 2025 5 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 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).