Automated Summary
Key Facts
The Applicant, Lantern Court (Baguley) Management Company Limited, sought dispensation from Section 20 consultation requirements for emergency fire safety works at Lantern Court. The works included installing a temporary fire alarm system and ventilation/compartmentalisation to address a serious fire hazard identified by Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service (GMFRS). A single objection was received from Mr and Mrs A G Stevenson, who questioned the delay in acting on prior fire risk assessments. The Tribunal granted the dispensation due to the immediate health and safety risks, noting that the works were necessary and that leaseholders could later challenge costs under Section 27A if needed.
Issues
- A key issue was whether the Applicant met the criteria under Section 20ZA(1) for dispensation from the multi-stage consultation process (notifying leaseholders, allowing contractor nomination, obtaining multiple estimates, and justifying contractor choice) for works classified as 'qualifying' due to exceeding £250 per tenant. The Tribunal assessed if the fire safety urgency justified exempting the Applicant from these procedural requirements, particularly the obligation to explain contractor selection.
- The Tribunal evaluated if there was evidence of financial prejudice to leaseholders beyond the unavoidable costs of fire safety remediation. The Applicant's actions, including parallel consultation and prudently managing the works, were weighed against Mr and Mrs Stevenson's concerns about procedural delays potentially complicating leaseholders' ability to fund repairs. The Tribunal concluded no significant financial risk was identified.
- The Tribunal was required to determine if the Applicant's request for dispensation from Section 20 consultation requirements under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 was reasonable, given the urgent need to address a serious fire hazard identified by the local fire authority. The works included installing a temporary fire alarm system and remedial ventilation/compartmentalisation to prevent building closure. The Applicant argued immediate action was necessary, bypassing the consultation process, while Mr and Mrs Stevenson objected to the delayed response to the 2020 fire risk assessment and questioned the consultation timeline.
Holdings
- The Tribunal determined that there is a clear and immediate risk to the health and safety of occupants as assessed by the local fire service.
- The Tribunal concluded that ventilation and compartmentalisation works were also required to be carried out speedily to address the fire hazard.
- The Tribunal found that work was required to install a suitable temporary alarm system due to the serious fire hazard identified.
- No significant financial prejudice to leaseholders was identified beyond the costs of remedial works, according to the Tribunal's determination.
- The Applicant's slower pace from September 2020 to March 2021 was explained as reasonable, though earlier action might have been possible.
- The Tribunal acknowledged the urgency of maintaining residential integrity, overriding the objection about process delays raised by Mr and Mrs Stevenson.
- The dispensation from Section 20 consultation requirements was granted, but leaseholders retain future rights to challenge costs under Section 27A.
Remedies
The dispensation sought by the Applicant from compliance with Section 20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 is granted for the reasons set out herein
Legal Principles
The Tribunal applied Section 20ZA of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to dispense with consultation requirements for qualifying works where there is an immediate risk to health and safety. The decision emphasized the necessity of urgent remedial works (fire alarm installation and ventilation) to address a serious fire hazard identified by the local fire service, overriding procedural delays that could compromise resident safety.
Cited Statute
- Service Charges (Consultation Requirements) (England) Regulations 2003
- Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
- Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005
Judge Name
- J R Rimmer
- H Lewis
Passage Text
- In the circumstances the Tribunal is satisfied that it is reasonable to dispense with the requirements to comply with section 20 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the Service Charges (Consultation Requirements)(England) Regulations 2003.
- There is nothing to suggest that, on evidence currently available, there is a significant risk of any financial prejudice to the leaseholders over and above the inevitable costs of remedial works.
- The Tribunal determined this matter without a hearing on 24th November 2021... the pressing urgency of maintaining the integrity of the building as residential accommodation was such that the objection is overborne and that the application was appropriate and justified.