First-tier Tribunal Rejects Late Application for Rent Increase Notice
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal rejected an application to challenge a rent increase notice because it was submitted after the proposed effective date. This means the tenant cannot contest the rent increase now.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant cannot refer a rent increase notice after the proposed effective date.
📖 What the law says
This section outlines the process for landlords to propose rent increases for assured periodic tenancies, excluding relevant low-cost tenancies. It specifies that a landlord can serve a notice proposing a new rent, which must take effect at the beginning of a new period specified in the notice, starting at least two months after the notice is served.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to hear the matter due to late filing.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) dismissed an application to refer a rent increase notice as it was filed after the proposed effective date, citing lack of jurisdiction under section 13(4) of the Housing Act 1988.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Dismissed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : CAM/26UF/MNR/2019/0010 Property : 64 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : In person Respondent : [redacted] : In person Type of application : Application referring a notice proposing a new rent under an Assured Periodic Tenancy DECISION
1. By an application received on 25th June 2019 Ms [NAME] sought to refer a notice of new rent under an assured periodic tenancy sent to her by the landlord Ms [RESPONDENT]. The notice is dated 17th May 2019. It proposes that the new rent of £825, increased from the previous rent of £800 should be effective from 24th June 2019.
2. In correspondence it seems that the parties had agreed that the rent would be payable from the beginning of each moth but there appears to be no suggestion that the new start date is not the 24th June 2019.
3. There was correspondence between the parties concerning the state of repair of the Property but by a letter purportedly dated 21st June 2019 Ms [NAME] made application to the tribunal to consider whether the proposed new rent would be payable.
4. Unfortunately 21st June was a Friday. the application was not received at the Tribunal offices until 25th June 2019, and bears that date stamp. Accordingly the application cannot be accepted by the Tribunal because it was not received before the beginning of the new period specified in
© CROWN COPYRIGHT the notice, which was 24th June 2019 (see section 13(4) of the Housing Act 1988). 5. The Tribunal finds that it does not have jurisdiction to determine this matter and the application is dismissed..
Name: Tribunal Judge Dutton Date: 16th September 2019 Signed:
ANNEX - RIGHTS OF APPEAL
1. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. The application 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 making the application is seeking.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Granted Right to New Lease Under 1993 Act
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Granted Permission to Purchase Freehold Interest
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Found Guilty of Breaching Noise Nuisance Clauses
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Permission to Skip Consultation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Quashes Prohibition Order for Lack of Evidence
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Fair Rent at £720.00 PCM
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Considering Tenant Improvements
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Approves Freehold Interest Transfer
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Urgent Roof Repairs Dispensation Without Full Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Freehold Purchase Price
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Premium for Lease Extension
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 tenant can purchase the reversionary freehold interest if the landlord cannot be found.
- The Tribunal approves the terms of a transfer deed following a vesting order under Section 25 of the Leasehold Reform Act 1993.
- Qualifying tenants are entitled to purchase the freehold interest under certain conditions.
- An applicant can obtain dispensation from consultation requirements if the works are urgent and no prejudice occurs.
- A local authority must provide sufficient evidence to prove serious hazards before serving a Prohibition Order.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- A tenant cannot challenge a rent increase notice after the proposed effective date.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The application to refer a rent increase notice was dismissed because it was filed after the proposed effective date.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the matter because the application was filed after the proposed effective date of the rent increase.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Section 13(4) of the Housing Act 1988 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the application was filed after the proposed effective date of the rent increase.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure their application to refer a rent increase notice is filed before the proposed effective date.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The date stamp on the application was crucial.
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 recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent increase notices.