Automated Summary
Key Facts
Daisey Court Properties Estate Management Company Limited applied for retrospective dispensation from consultation requirements under Section 20ZA of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 for an external wall system survey (EWS1) at Parkside, Foxglove & Bluebell House in Sheffield. The Tribunal granted dispensation due to urgent fire safety risks identified in the property's combustible external wall materials. The Applicant demonstrated that leaseholders were kept informed via letters, meeting minutes, and a communal portal, and no Respondent objected to a paper determination.
Issues
The main legal question is whether the Tribunal should grant retrospective dispensation from the consultation requirements of Section 20 of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 and the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003 for the external wall system survey (EWS1) works at Parkside, Foxglove & Bluebell House, considering the urgency and necessity of the works to address fire safety and water ingress issues, and the Applicant's compliance with informing leaseholders through various means despite not formally consulting them.
Holdings
The Tribunal concluded that it was reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements under Section 20ZA of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 for the external wall system survey (EWS1) at Parkside, Foxglove & Bluebell House. The decision was based on the urgency of addressing fire safety risks identified in three reports, which outweighed any potential prejudice to leaseholders. The Applicant, Daisey Court Properties Estate Management Company Limited, was continually updating leaseholders through letters and a communal portal.
Remedies
The Applicant is dispensed from complying with the consultation requirements in respect of the work specified in the application.
Legal Principles
The tribunal applied Section 20ZA of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 to dispense with consultation requirements for qualifying works when urgency and necessity outweigh potential prejudice to leaseholders. This section allows a tribunal to grant dispensation if satisfied it is reasonable, particularly when statutory consultation processes are impractical due to urgent safety concerns.
Cited Statute
- Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
- Service Charges (Consultation Requirements)(England) Regulations 2003
Judge Name
Laurence J Bennett
Passage Text
- 26. I accept from the details provided by the Applicant that the water ingress and damp issues at the Property were worsening. That the subsequent 3 reports identified fire and safety issues. That the potential risks to the occupiers of the apartments at the Property needed to be identified. That the works required to obtain the EWS1 survey report were therefore necessary and urgent and had to be carried out outside of the Section 20 consultation process.
- 28. I conclude it reasonable in accordance with Section 20ZA(1) of the Act to dispense with the consultation requirements, specified in Section 20 and contained in Service Charges (Consultation Requirements)(England) Regulations 2003 (SI 2003/1987).
- 27. Although formal consultation has not taken place, I note that the Applicant ensured that the Leaseholders were continually updated through numerous letters, minutes from Director meetings were circulated and information was placed on the communal tenant portal. Balancing the need for urgent action against dispensing with statutory requirements devised to protect service charge paying Leaseholders, I conclude the urgency outweighs any identified prejudice.