First-tier Tribunal Lacks Jurisdiction on Rent Increase Case

OUTCOME: Struck Out

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] CHAMBER ([NAME]) Case reference : CAM/00MX/MNR/2024/0608 [NAME] : 15 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicants (Tenant)

:

[APPELLANT] Respondents (Landlords)

: [COMPANY] of application : Section 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988 Determination of market rent payable.

Tribunal member(s)

:

[NAME](Hons)

Date of decision : 9 December 2024

DECISION

This has been a hearing on the papers which has been consented to by the parties. The documents that I was referred to are in individual responses produced by the Applicant and the Respondent. I have noted the contents and my decision is below. Background

1. On 13 October 2024 the Applicant, the Tenant of 15 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] (The [NAME]), made an Application (the Application) to the Tribunal referring a notice of increase in rent (the Notice) by the [NAME] under Section 13 of the Housing Act 1988.

2 2. The Application form was not supported by a section 13 notice. Therefore, the Tribunal on 15 October 2024 wrote to the tenant to request a copy of this. A copy was supplied by the tenant on the same day.

3. The Tribunal acknowledged receipt of the Application and wrote to both parties on 21 October 2024 to indicate that Tribunal’s preliminary opinion was that it may not have jurisdiction to consider the matter because it appears that the tenancy agreement contains a binding provision whereby the rent for a particular period will or may be greater than the rent for a previous period (i.e. a rent review mechanism) or it contains a provision whereby the rent may be increased within the first year of the tenancy. This provision is at paragraph 10.2 of your tenancy agreement.

4. The Tribunal considered that the preliminary jurisdiction issue could be decided on the basis of written representations and parties were invited to make such representations before 4 November 2024. Parties were informed that the Tribunal would concern itself solely with the question of whether it had jurisdiction to determine the application.

5. The Tribunal received a letter from the tenant, stating that “the tenancy agreement does contain a binding provision whereby the rent for a particular period may be greater that the rent from the previous period. However, this should be based on the Retail Price Index (RPI). In this case the proposed rent increase exceeds the RPI stated in my tenancy agreement and I would therefore like for the Tribunal to hear my case”

6. The Tribunal did not receive anything from the Landlord.

The Hearing

7. This hearing has been determined on the papers provided, as no request for a hearing was received by either party

The Law

8. The Tribunal must determine that it has jurisdiction to hear the Application by reference to the validity of application, in order to go on to determine a rent under S14 of the Act.

9. The tribunal gains its jurisdiction to deal with rent increases of assured periodic tenancies (eg week to week or month to month) from section 13(1) of the Housing Act 1988. Section 13 (1) applies to (a) a statutory periodic tenancy other than one which, by virtue of paragraph 11 or paragraph 12 in Part I of Schedule 1 to this Act, cannot for the time being be an assured tenancy; and

(b) any other periodic tenancy which is an assured tenancy, other than one in relation to which there is a provision, for the time being binding

3 on the tenant, under which the rent for a particular period of the tenancy will or may be greater than the rent for an earlier period

Issues

10. The tribunal explained to both parties that it would only deal with the question of jurisdiction at this stage. It would issue further directions in respect of the the market rent should it be satisfied that it had jurisdiction to determine that rent.

The Tribunal’s Decision

11. Paragraph 10.2 of the tenancy agreement states that “it is agreed that the rent defined in the agreement will be reviewed on the anniversary of this tenancy and upon each subsequent anniversary in line with the change in Retail Prices Index (RPI) for the previous 12 months and the rent varied accordingly either by way of an upward or downward adjustment.

12. The Tribunal gains its jurisdiction to deal with rent increases of assured periodic tenancies (eg week to week or month to month) from section 13(1) of the Housing Act 1988. Section 13 (1) applies to (a) a statutory periodic tenancy other than one which, by virtue of paragraph 11 or paragraph 12 in Part I of Schedule 1 to this Act, cannot for the time being be an assured tenancy; and

(b) any other periodic tenancy which is an assured tenancy, other than one in relation to which there is a provision, for the time being binding on the tenant, under which the rent for a particular period of the tenancy will or may be greater than the rent for an earlier period

The tenant argues that the increase does not fall in line with the tenancy agreement.

However, whilst the Tribunal can appreciate the tenant’s position , it does not have jurisdiction to determine whether the increase has been made in accordance with the provisions in the tenancy agreement. The tenant may wish to seek legal advice on this.

13. The tribunal is of the opinion that, having reviewed the provisions in respect of the rent review, this is such a case and under the provisions of the Housing Act 1988 as set out at para 12b above, the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to deal with the matter and the application is therefore struck out.

[NAME](Hons) Regional Surveyor

4

Rights of appeal

By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) ([NAME] Chamber) 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), on a point of law only, then a written application for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with the case. The application for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office within 28 days after the tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the person making the application. If the application is not made within the 28-day time limit, such application 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 application for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the tribunal to which it relates (i.e., give the date, the [NAME], and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party making the application is seeking. If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).