Section 20 Works “A Cost, or an Investment?”

That reaction is understandable.

Major works can be expensive and they do not always arrive at a convenient time. They can create worry, frustration and challenge, particularly where leaseholders feel they have had little warning.

But Section 20 works should not automatically be viewed as an unwelcome surprise.

In many cases, the lease has already set the expectation.

It may refer to internal decorations every five years, external repairs or redecorations every seven or eight years, or other regular obligations to repair, maintain and protect the building.

That does not mean works are required simply because a date has arrived. Buildings age differently, and some works can properly be deferred where condition allows.

But the wider point remains:

The cost may feel sudden.

The obligation often is not.

The Lease Sets the Framework

The lease is rarely the most exciting part of buying a property.

Most purchasers are understandably focused on price, mortgage, survey, completion, and moving in. The lease can feel long, technical and easy to overlook.

But it remains one of the most important documents in the transaction.

It sets out how the building is to be maintained.
It explains what costs may be recovered.
It defines how those costs are shared.

This is why major works can feel unexpected later on, even where the responsibility has existed from the outset.

A leaseholder may not have caused the deterioration.
They may not have owned the flat when it started.
They may not have expected the timing.

But they have purchased into a building with ongoing obligations.

Delay Does Not Protect the Building

In many blocks, major works are not carried out too early.

They are carried out too late.

That delay can happen for many reasons. Leaseholders may resist the cost. Directors may be reluctant to approve expenditure. Previous agents may have avoided difficult conversations. Reserve funds may not have been built up properly. Properties may have changed hands several times, with each owner hoping the issue will not fall during their period of ownership.

But buildings do not pause because decisions are deferred.

• Paint breaks down.

• Timber weathers.

• Roofs age.

• Water ingress worsens.

• Small repairs become larger repairs.

Pushing works further down the line may feel like saving money.

Often, it simply moves the problem forward at a higher cost.

Section 20 Is a Protection

Section 20 is often viewed as red tape - It should not be.

Its purpose is to protect leaseholders where significant costs are proposed through the service charge.

The process gives leaseholders visibility. It allows them to understand what is being proposed, why works are being considered, how contractors are being approached, and what the likely costs may be.

In some cases, leaseholders may also be able to nominate a suitable and competent contractor to provide an estimate.

That matters.

Section 20 gives leaseholders a voice in the process.

It does not always give them a veto.

Where works are necessary, recoverable under the lease, and properly consulted upon, the cost may still be payable. But the process should create transparency, not simply produce a bill.

A Lower Threshold Than Many Expect

Section 20 is not limited to huge projects.

For qualifying works, consultation is generally required where the cost to any one leaseholder exceeds £250. For qualifying long-term agreements, the threshold is generally more than £100 per year for any one leaseholder.

That means the process can apply to fairly ordinary building works once the cost is divided between leaseholders.

External repairs, redecorations, roof works, drainage works, lift works, fire safety works and other significant maintenance may all fall within the process.

The consultation may feel formal.

But the threshold for triggering it is often lower than many expect.

A Say, Not Always a Veto

This is one of the most important distinctions.

Section 20 is not simply a vote on whether the building should be maintained.

• Leaseholders can comment.

• They can ask questions.

• They can raise concerns.

• They may be able to nominate contractors.

• They can challenge unreasonable service charges where appropriate.

But the process does not mean required works disappear if they are unpopular.

A well-run consultation should create a better conversation.

Not:

“Here is the bill.”

And not:

“Nothing can happen unless everyone agrees.”

But:

“Here is the issue, here is the lease position, here is the proposed route forward, and here is your opportunity to comment.”

That is a very different discussion.

When Urgency Changes the Process

There will be occasions where the usual consultation process is not practical.

Some issues cannot safely wait several months. Water ingress, structural concerns, health and safety risks, or serious defects may require faster action.

In those circumstances, dispensation from the consultation requirements may sometimes be sought.

That should not be treated as a shortcut or convenience.

It simply recognises that buildings do not always fail neatly within administrative timescales.

Where the normal process cannot be followed, the reasons should be clear, the decision-making should be careful, and appropriate advice should be taken where required.

Cost Today, Condition Tomorrow

Major works are often seen only as a cost.

That is understandable.

A leaseholder receiving a demand for several thousand pounds will naturally focus on affordability, timing, and whether the expenditure is truly necessary.

But there is another side to the conversation.

A tired, poorly maintained building can affect more than appearance. It can affect buyer confidence, survey comments, lender interest, insurance position, future negotiation & asset value.

Where major works are expected but not yet completed, a switched-on buyer may seek to factor that into the purchase price.

A future contribution can quickly become a bargaining point.

The reverse can also be true.

Where works have been properly planned, consulted on, and completed to a good standard, the building may present far better. A buyer may have greater confidence. A seller may be in a stronger position.

Not every pound spent automatically adds value.

But doing nothing rarely improves a building.

A Shared Asset

A residential block is a shared asset.

Even where flats are individually owned, the building depends on collective maintenance, collective contribution, and shared responsibility.

That can be difficult. Owners have different priorities. Some live in the building. Some let their flats. Some are looking to sell. Some have only recently purchased. Others may have owned for many years.

But the building exists beyond each individual owner’s period of ownership.

Properties change hands.

Maintenance obligations remain.

That is why major works should not be viewed only as a demand for money.

They should be viewed as part of responsible building ownership.

The Better View

Not every recommendation needs immediate action.
Not every item needs to be done at once.
Not every building needs works simply because a certain number of years has passed.

But where works are genuinely required, delaying them rarely makes the issue disappear.

It usually moves the problem further down the line.

A well-run Section 20 process should not be about frightening leaseholders with cost. It should be about explaining the need, testing the proposal, inviting comment, considering suitable alternatives, and protecting the building.

Handled properly, it can build trust rather than damage it.

Because major works are not just about recovering expenditure.

They are about maintaining homes, protecting value, and recognising that responsible maintenance is part of good building stewardship.

A well-maintained building benefits everyone.

Not always immediately.

Not always without cost.

But almost always with purpose.

David Elsworth, Founder & Director of Worth Property Management