Bayheath House, Wakefield WF1 1DH MAN/00DB/LDC/2024/0055

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL
PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
Case No MAN/00DB/LDC/2024/0055
Between
RMB 102 LimitedApplicantThe Residential Long Leaseholders (see Annex)Respondent
Before
Tribunal Judge L BrownW ReynoldsPremier Estates Limited for the ApplicantDate 4 December 2025

DECISION

Dispensation for the Works described in paragraph 4 is granted pursuant to section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The Application[1]Application dated 31 July 2024 was made by Premier Estates Limited, as managing agent on behalf of RMB 102 Limited, the freeholder and landlord, of the Property which comprises 31 apartments with parking to the rear and external fire escape, within a converted police station.[2]The Respondents are the leaseholders of the residential flats in the Property, who were identified to the Tribunal by the Applicant with the Application together with a specimen lease for Plot 1, 20 Market Street, Wakefield WF1 1DF, the contents of which the Tribunal understands is identical for all of the apartments concerned. © CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025[3]The Applicant seeks dispensation pursuant to section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the Act”) in respect of consultation requirements in relation to certain qualifying works, within the meaning of the Act.[4]The qualifying works comprise replacement of the one ground floor rear entrance door leading from the car park and the three fire door exits on the external staircase. The reason for urgency for the works is because the doors did not meet adequate fire safety standards and allowed access to trespassers.[5]The only issue is whether it is reasonable to dispense with the statutory consultation requirements. Paper Determination Directions were made on 4 July 2025.[7]Those directions provided, amongst other things, that the applicant must within 28 days of the date of the directions, send to the Tribunal, with a copy to each respondent, a bundle of documents consisting of:a. the Tribunal application form;b. a statement of case explaining why the application had been made;c. any correspondence sent to the leaseholders in relation to the worksd. detailed reasons for the urgency of the works and the consequences upon the leaseholders of any delaye. any quotes or estimates for the proposed works and relevant reports; andf. copies of any other documents the Applicant sought to rely on in evidence.[8]The directions also provided that any leaseholder who opposed the Application must within 21 days of receipt of the documents referred to at paragraph 7 above complete and return the reply form attached to the directions and send it to the applicant and Tribunal together with a statement in response to the Application and any documents and witness statements which they sought to reply on in evidence.[9]The Applicants provided the documents that they proposed to rely upon in support of their application to the Respondents on 17 July 2025. No responses from leaseholders were provided and no objections to the Application were submitted to the Tribunal by any Respondent, none of whom have taken any part in the proceedings.[10]The directions provided that the tribunal considered the matter to be one that could be resolved by way of submission of written evidence and stated that, if any party wished to make oral representations, that party should request a hearing.[11]No such request has been made and the Application has been determined by the Tribunal on the papers submitted by the Applicant.[12]The directions expressly state that the Application concerns only whether or not it is reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements and does not concern the issue of whether any service charge costs resulting from any such works are reasonable or payable and that it will be open to the leaseholders to challenge any such costs charged by the Applicant. The Law[13]Section 20ZA(1) of the Act provides that: ‘Where an application is made to a tribunal for a determination to dispense with all or any of the consultation requirements in relation to any qualifying works or qualifying long term agreement, the tribunal may make the determination if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements.’[14]The Supreme Court in the case of Daejan Investments v Benson and others [2013] UKSC 14 set out certain principles relevant to section 20ZA. Lord Neuberger, having clarified that the purpose of sections 19 to 20ZA of the act was to ensure that tenants are protected from paying for inappropriate works and paying more than would be appropriate, went on to state: ‘it seems to me that the issue on which the [Tribunal] should focus when entertaining an application by a landlord under section 20ZA(1) must be the extent, if any, to which the tenants were prejudiced in either respect by the failure of the landlord to comply with the requirements’. Findings of Fact[15]The Tribunal is satisfied that the Application was properly brought and is in proper form.[16]The Applicant seeks dispensation from the consultation requirements as the works, which are qualifying works, were required urgently as the safety and security of the Property and residents was at risk.[17]The Applicant issued a Notice of Intention on 31 July 2024 in respect of the Works and provided to the Tribunal a copy of one quotation for the Works of £7,275 plus VAT. which was later increased to £7,900 plus VAT for a metal door to the ground floor. The Works were completed in October 2024.[18]There is no evidence that any objections to the Application was submitted.[19]The Tribunal is satisfied that making secure and fire-safety compliant the external doors of the Property is in the interests of the Respondents.[20]In the absence of any submissions from any Respondent objecting to the works or to the Application, or contending that granting the Applications would result in prejudice, the Tribunal finds no evidence that the Respondents would suffer prejudice in the event that the Application for dispensation from the consultation requirements was granted. Determination[24]In the circumstances set out above, the Tribunal considers it reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements. Dispensation is granted pursuant to section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.[25]This decision does not affect the Tribunal's jurisdiction upon any future application to make a determination under section 27A of the Act as to the reasonableness and standard of the work and/or whether any service charge costs are reasonable and payable. Tribunal Judge L Brown 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). ANNEX Bayheath House, Wakefield WF1 1DH Apartment 1 Thomas Frederik Snyman Apartment 2 Lawrence C R Saville and Katrina M M Saville Apartment 3 S & A Carter Properties Apartment 4 Copperfield Capital Ltd Apartment 5 Mr Robert & Mrs Karen Massie Apartment 6 Mr Abayomi Ayodeji Adeosun Apartment 7 Huw Bedwyr Davies Apartment 8 Neil Langford Apartment 9 Mr Chiedza Bianca Antonio Apartment 10 Julie Collingwood Apartment 11 Mr Jay Atwood Apartment 12 Colanus Properties (UK) Ltd Apartment 12a Jerry Winston Limited Apartment 14 Patrick Quarshie Apartment 15 Mark John Johnson and Deborah May Reid Apartment 16 Mr Matthew and Mrs Lisa Sanders Apartment 17 Joseph Fernando Apartment 18 Ahmed Ismail Apartment 19 Katherine Ann Belchamber Apartment 20 Neelam Kaur Sohi and Kuldip Singh Apartment 21 Mr James Haran & Mrs Geraldine Haran Apartment 22 Mr Robert Massie & Mrs Karen Massie Apartment 23 Michael Scheuermann Apartment 24 Mr Stephen Dixon a d Mrs Lynn Dixon Apartment 25 Arif Rajpura Apartment 26 Abeer Hamza Suria Apartment 27 Miss C L Hunter and Mr C S Shaw Apartment 28 Mr and Mrs Dixon Apartment 29 Mr Robert Swaby Apartment 30 Michael Scheuermann Apartment 31 Barrier Homes Ltd PORTAL 0502 FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : MAN/00DB/LDC/2024/0055 Property : Bayheath House, Wakefield WF1 1DH Applicant : RMB 102 Limited Representative : Premier Estates Limited Respondents : The Residential Long Leaseholders (see Annex) Type of Application : Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 – Section 20ZA Tribunal : Tribunal Judge L Brown Tribunal Member W Reynolds Date of Decision : 4 December 2025 DECISION Dispensation for the Works described in paragraph 4 is granted pursuant to section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The Application[1]Application dated 31 July 2024 was made by Premier Estates Limited, as managing agent on behalf of RMB 102 Limited, the freeholder and landlord, of the Property which comprises 31 apartments with parking to the rear and external fire escape, within a converted police station.[2]The Respondents are the leaseholders of the residential flats in the Property, who were identified to the Tribunal by the Applicant with the Application together with a specimen lease for Plot 1, 20 Market Street, Wakefield WF1 1DF, the contents of which the Tribunal understands is identical for all of the apartments concerned. © CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025[3]The Applicant seeks dispensation pursuant to section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“the Act”) in respect of consultation requirements in relation to certain qualifying works, within the meaning of the Act.[4]The qualifying works comprise replacement of the one ground floor rear entrance door leading from the car park and the three fire door exits on the external staircase. The reason for urgency for the works is because the doors did not meet adequate fire safety standards and allowed access to trespassers.[5]The only issue is whether it is reasonable to dispense with the statutory consultation requirements. Paper Determination Directions were made on 4 July 2025.[7]Those directions provided, amongst other things, that the applicant must within 28 days of the date of the directions, send to the Tribunal, with a copy to each respondent, a bundle of documents consisting of:a. the Tribunal application form;b. a statement of case explaining why the application had been made;c. any correspondence sent to the leaseholders in relation to the worksd. detailed reasons for the urgency of the works and the consequences upon the leaseholders of any delaye. any quotes or estimates for the proposed works and relevant reports; andf. copies of any other documents the Applicant sought to rely on in evidence.[8]The directions also provided that any leaseholder who opposed the Application must within 21 days of receipt of the documents referred to at paragraph 7 above complete and return the reply form attached to the directions and send it to the applicant and Tribunal together with a statement in response to the Application and any documents and witness statements which they sought to reply on in evidence.[9]The Applicants provided the documents that they proposed to rely upon in support of their application to the Respondents on 17 July 2025. No responses from leaseholders were provided and no objections to the Application were submitted to the Tribunal by any Respondent, none of whom have taken any part in the proceedings.[10]The directions provided that the tribunal considered the matter to be one that could be resolved by way of submission of written evidence and stated that, if any party wished to make oral representations, that party should request a hearing.[11]No such request has been made and the Application has been determined by the Tribunal on the papers submitted by the Applicant.[12]The directions expressly state that the Application concerns only whether or not it is reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements and does not concern the issue of whether any service charge costs resulting from any such works are reasonable or payable and that it will be open to the leaseholders to challenge any such costs charged by the Applicant. The Law[13]Section 20ZA(1) of the Act provides that: ‘Where an application is made to a tribunal for a determination to dispense with all or any of the consultation requirements in relation to any qualifying works or qualifying long term agreement, the tribunal may make the determination if satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements.’[14]The Supreme Court in the case of Daejan Investments v Benson and others [2013] UKSC 14 set out certain principles relevant to section 20ZA. Lord Neuberger, having clarified that the purpose of sections 19 to 20ZA of the act was to ensure that tenants are protected from paying for inappropriate works and paying more than would be appropriate, went on to state: ‘it seems to me that the issue on which the [Tribunal] should focus when entertaining an application by a landlord under section 20ZA(1) must be the extent, if any, to which the tenants were prejudiced in either respect by the failure of the landlord to comply with the requirements’. Findings of Fact[15]The Tribunal is satisfied that the Application was properly brought and is in proper form.[16]The Applicant seeks dispensation from the consultation requirements as the works, which are qualifying works, were required urgently as the safety and security of the Property and residents was at risk.[17]The Applicant issued a Notice of Intention on 31 July 2024 in respect of the Works and provided to the Tribunal a copy of one quotation for the Works of £7,275 plus VAT. which was later increased to £7,900 plus VAT for a metal door to the ground floor. The Works were completed in October 2024.[18]There is no evidence that any objections to the Application was submitted.[19]The Tribunal is satisfied that making secure and fire-safety compliant the external doors of the Property is in the interests of the Respondents.[20]In the absence of any submissions from any Respondent objecting to the works or to the Application, or contending that granting the Applications would result in prejudice, the Tribunal finds no evidence that the Respondents would suffer prejudice in the event that the Application for dispensation from the consultation requirements was granted. Determination[24]In the circumstances set out above, the Tribunal considers it reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements. Dispensation is granted pursuant to section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.[25]This decision does not affect the Tribunal's jurisdiction upon any future application to make a determination under section 27A of the Act as to the reasonableness and standard of the work and/or whether any service charge costs are reasonable and payable. Tribunal Judge L Brown 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). ANNEX Bayheath House, Wakefield WF1 1DH Apartment 1 Thomas Frederik Snyman Apartment 2 Lawrence C R Saville and Katrina M M Saville Apartment 3 S & A Carter Properties Apartment 4 Copperfield Capital Ltd Apartment 5 Mr Robert & Mrs Karen Massie Apartment 6 Mr Abayomi Ayodeji Adeosun Apartment 7 Huw Bedwyr Davies Apartment 8 Neil Langford Apartment 9 Mr Chiedza Bianca Antonio Apartment 10 Julie Collingwood Apartment 11 Mr Jay Atwood Apartment 12 Colanus Properties (UK) Ltd Apartment 12a Jerry Winston Limited Apartment 14 Patrick Quarshie Apartment 15 Mark John Johnson and Deborah May Reid Apartment 16 Mr Matthew and Mrs Lisa Sanders Apartment 17 Joseph Fernando Apartment 18 Ahmed Ismail Apartment 19 Katherine Ann Belchamber Apartment 20 Neelam Kaur Sohi and Kuldip Singh Apartment 21 Mr James Haran & Mrs Geraldine Haran Apartment 22 Mr Robert Massie & Mrs Karen Massie Apartment 23 Michael Scheuermann Apartment 24 Mr Stephen Dixon a d Mrs Lynn Dixon Apartment 25 Arif Rajpura Apartment 26 Abeer Hamza Suria Apartment 27 Miss C L Hunter and Mr C S Shaw Apartment 28 Mr and Mrs Dixon Apartment 29 Mr Robert Swaby Apartment 30 Michael Scheuermann Apartment 31 Barrier Homes Ltd PORTAL 0502