Cypress Point: First- tier Tribunal extends Remediation Order deadlines — What the decision means for Leaseholders and Landlords

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) has issued a decision concerning Cypress Point, Leylands Road, Leeds, varying the timescale and obligations under an existing Remediation Order made under section 123 of the Building Safety Act 2022. The decision, published on 25 January 2026, provides insight and commentary on how the Tribunal will approach applications to vary remediation orders and on guidance relevant to all remediation schemes generally.

Background

The original Remediation Order, made on 29 July 2024, required the landlord (Junestead (Cypress Point) Limited) to resolve building safety defects by 31 July 2025.  Defects included external cladding and balcony works as well as compartmentation issues.  At the time, contractors and consultants were already engaged and were preparing full design and tender packages. 
 
On 5 June 2025, the landlord lodged an application to extend the completion date, from 31 July 2025 to 31 December 2026 (so by just under 18 months), citing the practical realities of design, tendering, and contractor preparation.  Leaseholders objected, and the dispute came before the Tribunal on 11 September 2025.

The Tribunal’s Decision

The Tribunal agreed to vary the Remediation Order, accepting the landlord’s request to push the completion deadline to 31 December 2026. However, this was subject to conditions.

While acknowledging that progress had been made, the Tribunal did not consider that this was made visible to leaseholders, commenting that it is fair for leaseholders to expect updates and to be properly informed of all updates (including plans and changes). The varied order therefore incorporates an express requirement for regular, clear updates to the leaseholders - reflecting the Tribunal’s view that transparency is central.
 
For leaseholders, the decision strengthens procedural protections: even where timelines slip, they should expect structured, reliable updates.

For landlords and developers, the message is clear: transparency and credible evidence of progress are essential. Landlords are expected to issue clear and frequent communication – regular reporting is recommended.
 
In concluding, the Tribunal stated that it was satisfied that the landlord had not ignored its obligations and was actively progressing the project. It highlighted the following reasons supporting its conclusion:

1. Progress: The landlord had been taking substantive steps beyond just pursuing grant funding. This included selecting and appointing suitable consultants and contractors and working to finalise the detailed design and specification for the works, as well as seeking the necessary planning and regulatory approvals.
2. Challenges: The process of finalising the design and specification proved more challenging than originally anticipated, contributing to delays.
3. Building Safety Regulator (BSR) requirements: Since the Remediation Order was issued, additional regulatory requirements emerged and BSR approval was required – “in particular, neither the parties nor the Tribunal had appreciated that, in addition to planning permission, separate BSR approval would need to be obtained for the works.”
4. BSR delay: The BSR approval procedure itself had created further delay, and the landlord encountered difficulty sourcing consultants qualified to manage the application process – but the BSR application had been lodged on 24 August 2025. It was expected to take 16-20 weeks for the BSR to deal with the application.

Our content explained