Acton House, Scoresby Street, Bradford, West Yorkshire BD1 5EN MAN/00CX/LDC/2024/0047

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL
PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
Case No MAN/00CX/LDC/2024/0047
Between
Acton House RTM Company LtdApplicantVarious Long Residential LeaseholdersRespondent
Before
Judge H Khan (Judge)Ms J Jacobs (Valuer)JB Leitch Limited for the ApplicantDate 28 April 2025Property: Acton House, Scoresby Street, Bradford, West Yorkshire BD1 5ENType of application: To dispense with the requirement to consult lessees about major works s20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

DECISION

[1]The Applicant’s application pursuant to s20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 for dispensation from the statutory consultation requirements is granted without condition. © CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025[2]This dispensation does not affect the Respondents’ rights to make an application to the Tribunal as to the reasonableness or payability of the service charge under s27A and 19 of the 1985 Act. The Application[3]On 4 July 2024, the Tribunal received an application from Acton House RTM Company Ltd (‘the Applicant’).[4]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 by Section 20 of the 1985 Act in respect of qualifying works required concerning fire safety.[5]The Applicant seeks dispensation on the grounds that works were urgently required because of the need to comply with Enforcement notices and the health and safety risks due to the fire safety nature of the works.[6]Following directions given on 28 January 2025, the Tribunal received confirmation from the Applicant on 31 March 2025, that no objections had been received to the application.[7]The only issue for the Tribunal to consider is whether or not it is reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements. The application does not concern the issue of whether any service charge costs resulting from any such works are reasonable or indeed payable and it will be open to lessees to challenge any such costs charged by the Applicant. Consideration[7]The Tribunal considered the application and supporting documents.[8]This was a determination made on the papers and there was no inspection. No party requested a hearing or inspection, and it was not considered necessary for a fair determination of the issues. Determination and reasons[9]Having considered the application and totality of the evidence, the Tribunal is satisfied that it is reasonable for dispensation to be granted from the consultation requirements under s20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (‘the 1985 Act’) and the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003 for the reasons set out below.[10]The purpose of the statutory consultation process is to ensure that leaseholders are given the fullest opportunity to comment on expenditure for which they will be partly liable to pay.[11]The relevant law relating to this application is s20ZA of the 1985 Act which allows the Tribunal to grant dispensation from that statutory consultation requirement if is satisfied it is reasonable to do so. In considering the application, we have considered the principles set down by the Supreme Court in Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson & others [2013] UKSC 14.[12]The Property is described by the Applicant as a mixed building comprising 30 residential flats over 5 storeys, ground to fourth floor. The premises contain an office suite on the ground floor. The flats located within the Premises are subject to long residential leases.[13]The Applicant says that works are urgently required including fire door works, compartmentation works and fire alarm works.[14]The Applicant’s representative confirmed by email on 31 March 2025 that no objections to the application had been received.[15]The Tribunal was satisfied it was reasonable to grant dispensation under s20ZA of the 1985 as the application is unopposed and the Tribunal is satisfied that the fire door works, compartmentation works and fire alarm works were highly urgent given the Applicant’s need to comply with several Enforcement Notices issued by West Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service. There are health and safety risks due to the fire safety nature of the works. There is no evidence suggesting the Respondents would be prejudiced by a failure of the landlord to consult.[16]The Tribunal considered whether it was appropriate to impose conditions on that grant of dispensation. However, it decided it was not appropriate to do so.[17]We observed that although there were no objections to the application, the application was made some after a considerable time after which works had been undertaken.[18]The Tribunal, therefore, is satisfied that it is reasonable to grant dispensation under s20ZA of the 1985 Act from the s20 consultation requirements, and for that dispensation to be without condition.[19]The Tribunal makes no determination as to the reasonableness of the works or the reasonableness of the costs of the works and whether they are recoverable from the Respondents though the service charges. Those are matters which the Tribunal may consider on an application to the Tribunal under s27A and 19 of the 1985 Act. Note: Appeals[1]A person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) must seek permission to do so by making written application to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office that has been dealing with the case.[2]The application must arrive at the Tribunal within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision, and should be sent by email to rpnorthern@justice.gov.uk[3]If the person wishing to appeal does not comply with the 28-day time limit, the person shall include with the application for permission to appeal a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28-day time limit; the Tribunal will then decide whether to extend time or not to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed.[4]The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party making the application is seeking.