VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Rapidly Changing Gas Prices

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal allowed a landlord to bypass the usual consultation process with tenants because of rapidly changing gas prices, ensuring that the decision would not harm the tenants.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord may be granted dispensation from consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 if it would cause no real prejudice to the tenants.

Topics

tenancyconsultation requirementsdispensation

Provisions

Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 s.20Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA

📖 What the law says

Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 s.20ZA

The First-tier Tribunal can grant an exemption from consultation requirements if it determines that it is reasonable to do so, without causing real harm to the tenants.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements due to rapidly changing gas prices.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal granted dispensation from consultation requirements for a landlord due to rapidly changing gas prices, ensuring no real prejudice to tenants.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

1

Case Reference : BIR/37UG/LDC/2024/0023

Property

: [APPELLANT] [NAME], [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Applicant: [redacted]

(The Management Company)

Representative

: [COMPANY]

Respondents

: [redacted]

[RESPONDENT] (landlord) (2)

Type of Application : Application to dispense with the consultation requirements for a qualifying long term agreement pursuant to s.20 of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 ('the Act') under s.20ZA of the Act.

Tribunal Members : [NAME] B.Sc.(Est.Man.) FRICS (Chairman)

[NAME] of Hearing : N/A Decided on submitted papers

Date of Decision : 09 April 2025

____________________________________________________________

DECISION

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

Introduction

1 The Applicant applied to the First-tier Tribunal ([NAME]) on 2 September 2024 for an order to dispense with the consultation requirements in Section 20 of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985. The section requires landlords to consult tenants before entering a qualifying long term agreement that would cost each tenant more than £100 in any one year and there are Regulations setting out a timetable and procedure to be followed for consultation.

2 However, the Act envisages there may be occasions where for various reasons a landlord may be unable to consult, for example cases of emergency, and there is provision in section 20ZA for a landlord to apply to the Tribunal for 'dispensation' to over-ride the consultation requirements. An application can be made before or after an agreement has been made.

3 In this case, the Applicant applied for dispensation from the requirement to consult the [NAME] on the cost of a qualifying long term agreement to supply gas to a communal boiler providing hot water to a development of flats. They considered it would benefit the [NAME] if the Applicant were able to enter a long term contract with a [NAME] but as gas prices were changing rapidly they could have changed before the consultation process could have been completed.

4 The Applicant did not propose a contract with any particular [NAME] but general dispensation order that would have provided them with sufficient flexibility to place a contract when required.

5 The only issue for the Tribunal is whether or not it would be reasonable to dispense with the consultation requirements. Consenting to the application for dispensation does not preclude a subsequent application to the Tribunal by any of the Respondents to decide whether the cost of the 'qualifying long term agreement' was reasonably incurred or whether the amount paid was unreasonable.

6 The Tribunal issued Directions on 12 September 2024 and the case was listed for decision by Tribunal Members on 6 February 2025. The members requested further information from the Applicant to which the Applicant's agent replied on 24 February, following which the Tribunal re-convened on 12 March to reach its Decision.

Facts Found

7 The Tribunal did not inspect the property. It relied on the description provided by the Applicant which described it as a development of 75 flats managed by a [COMPANY].

Relevant Law

8 The Applicant provided the Tribunal with a sample lease relating to a Flat known as 'Plot 7, [APPELLANT] [NAME], Albert St., Newark' and the other leases were assumed to be similar. It was granted for 200 years from 1 January 2002 at an initial ground rent of £125 p.a. subject to a service charge.

9 A landlord would normally have to comply with consultation requirements in section 20 of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 before entering a long term contract but in this case, due to the time constraints of changing gas prices, the landlord applied for dispensation of the consultation requirements under section 20ZA of the Act.

3

10 The Tribunal can grant dispensation if satisfied it would be reasonable to do so [Section 20 ZA(1) of the Act] providing it would cause no real prejudice to the tenants [[COMPANY]. v [NAME] 2013 UKSC 14].

Submissions

Applicant 11 The submission was made on the Application Form. It stated: 'In this unique block of flats, there is a communal boiler which supplies communal hot water to all the properties. The cost of the gas for this communal boiler is the liability under the terms of the leases of the [NAME]. The contract rates of gas we have been quoted are only valid for a certain number of days, after which we will be supplied with a new quote which again will only be valid for a short period. Due to how rates for gas contracts work in England and Wales, we will be unable to conduct a full section 20 consultation. If we enter a contract for less than 12 months the contract rates are much higher, and this would prejudice the leaseholders.'

Respondent 12 The Tribunal wrote to the Respondent [NAME] inviting comment on the application but received no replies.

Tribunal Decision

13 As none of the Respondent [NAME] objected to the application the Tribunal finds there would be no prejudice in granting dispensation. Accordingly, the Tribunal grants dispensation for the Application under section 20ZA of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985.

[NAME] B.Sc.(Est.Man.) FRICS

Date:

Appeal Procedure

If a party is dissatisfied with the Decision they may apply to this Tribunal for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal ([NAME]). Any such application must be received within 28 days of the date these Reasons have been sent to the Applicant [rule 52 of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013].

If the person wishing to appeal does not comply with the 28 day time limit, they shall include with the application for permission to appeal a request for an extension of time and the reason for not applying within the 28 day time limit. The Tribunal will then decide whether or not to extend the time limit to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed. The application must identify the Tribunal decision to which it relates, state the grounds of appeal and the result the party making the application is seeking.

Alternatively, in accordance with section 11 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and rule 21 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2010, a party may make further application for permission to appeal to the

Upper Tribunal ([NAME]) on a point of law only. Such application must be made in writing and received by the Upper Tribunal ([NAME]) no later than 28 days after the date on which the First-tier Tribunal sent notice of this refusal to the party applying for permission to appeal. Where possible, any such further

4

application for permission to appeal should be sent by email to [EMAIL] to enable the Upper Tribunal ([NAME]) to deal with it more efficiently. The Upper Tribunal ([NAME]) may also be contacted by post at: 5th [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] (tel: [PHONE]).

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • The landlord provides evidence showing no real prejudice to tenants.
  • The landlord demonstrates a reasonable excuse for non-compliance with Improvement Notices due to tenant-caused issues.
  • The local housing authority serves an Improvement Notice based on identified Category 2 hazards.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The landlord fails to comply with Improvement Notices regarding disrepair issues.
  • The tenant's request to acquire a freehold interest is denied due to the landlord's unavailability and lack of compliance with statutory requirements.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

It decided to grant dispensation from the consultation requirements for a landlord due to rapidly changing gas prices.

Who was involved?

The landlord and the tenants of a residential property were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to grant dispensation because the rapidly changing gas prices meant that the consultation process would be outdated by the time it was completed.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 sections 20 and 20ZA were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was that the rapidly changing gas prices would render the consultation process ineffective if followed.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the person who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation might also be granted dispensation if they can show that the consultation process would be rendered ineffective due to rapidly changing circumstances.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence of rapidly changing gas prices and the potential ineffectiveness of the consultation process mattered.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) within 28 days.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for a case like this.

Official source: First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.