Application Struck Out: Claimant Fails to Meet Jurisdiction Requirements
📌 In brief
In a recent tenancy dispute, the First-tier Tribunal struck out the claimant's a person due to lack of jurisdiction, and ordered the Respondent to reimburse the claimant's a person fee.
⚖️ Legal holding
The Tribunal lacks jurisdiction over the matter when the financial penalty is withdrawn before the hearing.
📖 Technical summary
The case was struck out due to lack of jurisdiction, but the applicant's fee was reimbursed by the respondent.
📜 Headnote Official document
In a tenancy dispute, the First-tier Tribunal (Judge Bernadette MacQueen) struck out the claimant's application for failing to meet jurisdiction requirements, ordering the Respondent to reimburse the claimant's application fee.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Struck Out
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : CAM/22UJ/HNA/2025/0606 Property : 127 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : Litigant in Person Respondent : [redacted] Representative : Private Sector Housing Team Type of [NAME] : Appeal against financial Penalty – Section 249A & Schedule 13A to the Housing Act 2004 (the Act) Tribunal : Judge Bernadette MacQueen Date of notice : 2 September 2025
[NAME] TO RULE 9(2) OF THE TRIBUNAL (PROCEDURE) (FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL) ([NAME]) RULES 2013
1. By formal Notice from the Tribunal dated 21 July 2025, the Tribunal indicated that it considered it had no jurisdiction in respect of your [NAME] and invited representations from both parties.
2. The Tribunal received a response from the Applicant dated 6 August 2025 but did not receive a response from the Respondent. The Applicant confirmed that the financial penalty had been withdrawn and asked that the Tribunal order that the £110 [NAME] fee she had paid to the Tribunal be reimbursed to her by the Respondent.
2 3. For the reasons set out in the formal Notice and here, the [NAME] is struck out on grounds that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in respect of it.
Payment of Tribunal Fee
4. The Tribunal orders that the Respondent pay the Applicant £110 in respect of the [NAME] fee that the Applicant paid to the Tribunal. This order is made because the Applicant had to pay the [NAME] fee to the Tribunal before the Respondent withdrew the financial penalty.
5. The Respondent must make this payment within 28 days from the date of this order.
6. This order is made under Rule 13(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013. Financial Redress for Damage and Distress Caused 7. The Applicant also applied for £34,000 financial redress for damage and distress caused. This is made up of lost rent, utility bills, boiler and parts, travel and petrol and £1,800 for admin/appeal time and labour.
8. The Tribunal’s power to make an order for costs is contained within Rule 13 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013.
9. The Tribunal does not make an order for costs. This is because before an order can be made, the Tribunal must be satisfied that there has been unreasonable conduct. The Respondent issued a financial penalty, however, took the decision to withdraw the financial penalty notice and notified the Tribunal of this promptly. The Tribunal therefore does not find that the Respondent’s conduct amounts to unreasonable behaviour within the context of the Tribunal’s costs powers.
10. With that said. the Tribunal notes that the Respondent has upheld the stage one complaint made to them by the Applicant and has offered an apology. The Tribunal further notes that the Applicant has submitted a stage two complaint to the Respondent and therefore this complaint will need to be considered by the Respondent under their complaints process.
Name: Judge Bernadette MacQueen
Date: 2 September 2025
3 Rights of appeal By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013, the Tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may have. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), then a written [NAME] for permission must be made to the First- tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with the case. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office within 28 days after the Tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the [NAME]. If the [NAME] is not made within the 28-day time limit, such [NAME] must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28-day time limit; the Tribunal will then look at such reason(s) and decide whether to allow the [NAME] for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates (i.e. give the date, the property and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking. If the Tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further [NAME] for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Property Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Halts Market Rent Determination Until Valid Notice Confirmed
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Reviews Pitch Fee Increase Based on CPI
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment for Assured Tenancy: First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Management Company Allowed Urgent Lift Repairs Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Works on Residential Estate
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) RTM Company Granted Dispensation for Urgent Electrical Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Landlord Permission for Urgent Repairs Due to Wa…
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal struck out the claimant's application due to lack of jurisdiction.
Who was involved?
The claimant and the Respondent (likely a local council).
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that it lacked jurisdiction over the application because the statutory requirements were not met.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 2004 and the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction over the application.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
Against the claimant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure their application meets all statutory requirements to avoid having it struck out.
What evidence or documents mattered?
No specific evidence or documents are mentioned in the judgment.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving legal proceedings.
