Section 20 Consultation

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Section 20 Consultation


    I am one of 6 owners in a block of flats who own a share of the freehold and are directors on the management company. Each of the owners are leaseholders.

    We need to get some major urgent work done to the roof which is likely to cost ~£10,000. It is likely that we'll have difficulty with the two of the owners contributing.

    If we are all directors and owners of the freehold rather than just straight forward leaseholders, do we still need to go through the three stage Section 20 consultation process if the majority of directors have agreed on a quote and for the work go ahead?

    My worry is that if we have to legal action against one of the owners and we haven't gone through the proper process then we won't be able to recover any more than £250.

    Any advice greatly appreciated.


    To be legal, you need to go through the procedure. If someone is likely not to want to pay, that's particularly important.

    A single leaseholder can challenge for failure to do this, and they can even change their mind after any company vote. From a legal point of view company members are not the same as leaseholders.

    If you could get 100% agreement, you might be able to risk it, but if non-payment is likely you need to consider a pre-emptive application to the FTT to waive the process. Generally though, in the case of urgent work, if you can demonstrate that you consulted as much as possible within the available time, and that you took steps to ensure you got value for money, you should be able to get a retrospective dispensation. Because of case law, from the Daejan case, you will be able to recover most or all of the cost. The test will be how much would it have cost if the consultation had been done in full, rather than a limit of £250.

    Some people report that managing agents are not doing S20's, because the Daejan case severely weakens the law.


      Thank you for your reply

      The owner of the top floor flat who wants the work done has has got two quotes and emailed the rest of us all of the details, asking for feedback, however, he wants wants to book the work in for this week - 5 days after sending out this information.

      I don't think extending the consultation period would have meant he would have got a significantly lower quote.

      Unfortunately the owner that we will have the problem with never replies to any form of communication (and owes a large amount of service charge payments), so no matter how long the consultation period I doubt we'd hear anything from him.


        It's a pity you couldn't prove you would hear nothing from them. If you could, you would have proved that curtailing the consultation did not disadvantage them, so they would have no claim post Daejan, as long as the FTT was prepared to give retrospective dispensation.

        The danger here is that share of the freehold type company members tend to not like the delays that S20 causes, in all circumstances, whereas dispensation is only intended for real emergencies (e.g. the lift in a retirement complex).


          Thank you, really appreciate the insight.


            One more you know what the minimum length of time is between each stage of the S20 consulation process? From my own research it appears to be 30 days.



              30 days from when each of the notices is deemed to have been received. There are only two stages if go for the lowest bid.

              Contractors may or may not be unwilling to prepare quotes before the specification has stabilised, and may be unwilling to schedule a start day before they are 100% sure of the contract.

              If you have a non-payer, how are you going to pay for the work. Most leases don't allow you to borrow money from other leaseholders.


              Latest Activity


              • Freehold confusion
                by davetg
                30 years ago I bought a flat from a friend. The freehold at the time was registered to my friend and the lady who owned the other flat. I understood at the time that I would replace the friend on the freehold but this never happened. This was not a problem until now as when work on the structure of...
                24-05-2022, 14:29 PM
              • Reply to Freehold confusion
                by davetg
                Thanks for the reply - both flats have separate 999 year leases so i guess the freehold is of little value. I will look in to TR1.

                I have always insured my flat separately and assumed the other flat was doing the same - is this a problem?...
                24-05-2022, 14:48 PM
              • Reply to Old managing agents accounts
                by jazzythumper
                Thanks, I’m not sure that has been provided, if it hasn’t can we force them to produce this?

                Would it be a simple case of sending a letter with a timescale to respond and if not received followed by the magistrates route?...
                24-05-2022, 14:39 PM
              • Old managing agents accounts
                by jazzythumper
                Since obtaining the RTM and changing the managing agent, we have never been given full accounts / receipts for the previous year(s). We believe that as the old freeholder and leaser holder of one of the flats were represented by the same solicitor that prior to the sale of the freehold, we were subsidising...
                20-05-2022, 11:21 AM
              • Reply to Freehold confusion
                by Section20z
                1.He will need to sign a TR1 and transfer title to you but it really needs to be done through a solicitor or land registry won't be happy with his ID.
                2. If you have a separate lease on your flat then freehold is not worth much, if not then it's worth what the flats worth at least .
                3. Cost...
                24-05-2022, 14:37 PM
              • Reply to Share of feehold/shared service charges?
                by Stu1020
                Thank you for the response Macromia this is a useful conversation.

                I can see why the current proportion might be justified, I have been paying 38% towards the buildings insurance the last 4/5 years. However, my dispute is now arising because we are unable to move forward with existing covenants,...
                24-05-2022, 08:55 AM
              • Reply to Section 20
                by Anna1985
                The driveway/front garden partially belongs to the freeholder and partially leaseholder. The freeholder's maintenance covered by leaseholders, the leaseholder must keep the property in the state of repair but won't do....
                24-05-2022, 08:23 AM
              • Reply to RTM Hand Over Issues
                by Section20z
                We lost a fair bit of reserve fund when we went RTM but consoled ourselves with the knowledge they would no longer be ripping us off annually.
                24-05-2022, 07:59 AM
              • S20 - Quotes not valid for long enough for 30 day consult
                by Flatman78
                Hi LZ Community

                Just wondering if anyone's had/having any issues with S20 and allowing leaseholder 30 days to review estimates, raise concerns etc.

                Building material prices have fluctuated massively since covid and brexit.
                with a combination of Brexit, impact from russia/ukraine...
                23-05-2022, 14:42 PM
              • Reply to S20 - Quotes not valid for long enough for 30 day consult
                by Flatman78
                Thanks Gordon999

                You can see from above reply to Macromia that's your comment wouldn't be relevant to me. there is no managing agent. It's just me (FH) and LH in upstairs flat.
                Thanks for taking time to reply though....
                23-05-2022, 20:29 PM