Why would managing agent use S20 dispensation?

[eagle2]

The reason should have been explained to you when the application was made and you should have had the opportunity to challenge the application. The Tribunal would have considered if there was any prejudice to the leaseholders and should have made any appropriate comments within its decision.

[Flashback1966]

Have a flat in a block. The communal area is in very poor condition. Lighting not working for 15 years. Carpets worn out and threadbare. You can see the floorboard in places. Electrical cupboard door falling off.... Some residents leaving furniture in hallway.

The managing agents applied for S20 dispensation for the electrical works and new fire door. Even though have neglected their responsibility for almost 15 years.

Why did the managing agents, choose to go for the S20 dispensation route, rather then go for the full S20 consultation process?

Given they ignore their responsibility for 15+ years, would a couple of extra months made any difference?

It just seems they did n't want to consult leaseholders.

Two of the flats are owned by the Freeholder. I am wondering if some shady deal was done (?).

They were granted dispensation, but in my opinion, this was wrong, as the works were not sudden, but have been known for some time.

Is there a a reason they would want to do this?