When consultation has not been completed, a landlord may need advice about an application to dispense with some or all requirements. Section 20ZA gives the tribunal that jurisdiction; a surveyor cannot grant dispensation. The practical task for a building professional is to explain condition, scope, options and the available record honestly. This guide describes an evidence brief for the client's legal adviser, without predicting whether an application will succeed or telling a leaseholder what a particular bill is payable for.
Separate dispensation from the underlying works dispute
Section 20ZA allows the appropriate tribunal to dispense with consultation requirements where it considers that reasonable. In England this is a First-tier Tribunal matter. An application can concern a proposed programme or consultation problems identified after events. Its existence is not itself a decision, and a favourable decision on consultation does not resolve every separate issue about the works or their cost.
Start the instruction by identifying the question the adviser needs answered. Is it about the urgency of a condition, the reasonable alternatives available at a particular time, tender comparisons or the effect of missing information? Keep arguments about consultation distinct from questions about workmanship, scope and lease recoverability. A technical report can support a defined issue without presenting itself as a legal assessment of the whole claim.
Understand the prejudice approach without promising an outcome
In Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson [2013] UKSC 14, the Supreme Court focused on relevant prejudice from a failure to consult, in the context of protection against unnecessary work or inappropriate cost. Dispensation is not simply a punishment for procedural fault. The court also recognised that conditions can address the circumstances, including relevant losses and reasonable costs. The actual tribunal decision remains dependent on the case.
For the technical brief, identify what information or opportunity was missing and how that might have affected the works or procurement decision. Avoid general statements that everyone knew about the project or that the contractor did a good job. Those assertions do not explain whether a different scope, contractor or price could realistically have been considered if the consultation information had been available.
Build the chronology from contemporaneous records
Assemble inspection dates, photographs, resident reports, advice, estimates, instructions and relevant notices in order. Keep the original documents, including qualifications and incomplete information. Mark recollections as recollections and distinguish the date an event occurred from the date it was written down. A later account should not silently replace a document that shows what the client actually knew at the time.
Link each technical conclusion to its supporting record. A report describing water entry on one date may not establish the state of the roof months earlier. A quotation received after work started may not show that the contractor could have priced or delivered an alternative at the earlier decision point. Explain those limits so the legal adviser can assess the evidence rather than relying on an overstated chronology.
Explain urgency through the condition and available choices
Where urgency is relied on, describe the reported problem, inspection findings, apparent consequences and advice given. Identify any temporary protection or investigation considered and explain what was known about its suitability. Do not turn the word emergency into a standard paragraph for every water leak or external repair. The explanation should follow the evidence for that particular building and decision.
Separate immediate protective measures from the full permanent scheme. Record why any work could or could not wait and who authorised it. The responsible advisers should determine the legal response and any application. HCS can provide technical evidence within its appointment, but it cannot retrospectively validate notice service, promise that urgency guarantees dispensation or certify that all later expenditure follows from an initial urgent defect.
Show the alternatives and the procurement information
Keep specifications and tender returns in the versions used for the decision. Identify whether alternative methods were considered, which quantities or access arrangements were uncertain, and how exclusions affected the comparison. Where a leaseholder suggests an alternative, describe what technical information would be needed to assess it fairly. Do not reject it simply because it was not the option adopted by the original team.
A useful comparison explains differences in scope and information, not just totals. If the records cannot support a conclusion about the likely cost of an alternative, say so. Avoid inventing a saving or assigning a percentage to uncertainty without evidence. The expert's task is to assist with the defined technical question, including inconvenient or incomplete information, rather than write a guaranteed justification for an earlier appointment decision.
Read the order and any conditions carefully
If dispensation is granted with conditions, obtain advice on exactly what must be done and when. A short announcement that the landlord won can conceal qualifications that matter to the parties. Keep the complete order, reasons and any later directions in the instruction file. The surveyor should understand which further technical records or clarifications are required, without interpreting the legal effect beyond the agreed professional role.
Continue to distinguish the consultation outcome from any other live disagreement. A question about the reasonable standard of work, a disputed scope item or the amount recoverable under a lease may need separate consideration. Update the evidence schedule when further documents arrive, retaining earlier versions. Do not alter a report's findings simply to make them read as though they were known before the relevant decision.
Agree an independent and properly bounded instruction
Send the block address, parties, current tribunal stage, directions, relevant notices and the question proposed for the surveyor. Identify the deadlines and who will provide legal advice. The HCS major works review route begins with scope and conflict checks; an existing managing-agent appointment for the same block may prevent an independent instruction for a leaseholder or residents' association.
HCS does not prepare or serve statutory Section 20 notices, conduct the client's legal assessment or promise a tribunal result. Where HCS has an appointed technical role, its report should state the information reviewed, inspection limits and assumptions. Keep proposed further work separate from an accepted instruction. That produces a usable evidence brief while leaving legal submissions, procedural choices and advice on payment with the appropriate adviser.