VadeLab
DismissedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Improvement Notice Appeal Confirmed by First-tier Tribunal

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal confirmed some issues and modified others in an Improvement Notice appeal, setting compliance dates and fees for the landlord. The decision was based on the Housing Act 2004 and the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (England) Regulations 2005.

⚖️ Legal holding

A local housing authority has the power to serve an improvement notice if it identifies Category 2 hazards in a residential property.

Topics

Improvement NoticeCategory 2 HazardsResidential Property

Provisions

Housing Act 2004 s.11Housing Act 2004 s.12Housing Health and Safety Rating System (England) Regulations 2005

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 2004 s.12

A local housing authority can serve an improvement notice if they find a Category 2 hazard in a residential property and there is no existing management order related to the property.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal confirmed some issues and modified others in an Improvement Notice appeal, setting compliance dates and fees.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal confirmed some issues and modified others in an Improvement Notice appeal, setting compliance dates and fees for the landlord. The decision was based on the Housing Act 2004 and the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (England) Regulations 2005.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Dismissed

1

Case Reference : BIR/00CN/HIN/2024/0004

Property

: 196 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Applicant: [redacted]

Respondent

: [redacted]

Represented by : Miss [NAME], Environmental Health Officer

Type of Application : Appeal against Improvement Notice under Part 3, Schedule 1

to the Housing Act 2004

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

Mr [NAME]. [NAME], JP

Date and Venue of : N/A. Decision on submitted papers and property inspection. Hearing

Date of Decision : 2 May 2025

____________________________________________________________

DECISION

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

DECISION

1 The Improvement Notice is confirmed in respect of some Issues, some issues are reduced from Category 1 to Category 2 and others deleted as set out below and more particularly in the following paragraphs. All work is required to be completed by 16 June 2025.

Issue 1 - Excess cold Originally Category 1 - Now reduced to Category 2

1.1

Boiler not functioning

Deleted

1.2

Unknown loft insulation

1.3

Dampness to second floor bedroom rear corner wall

1.4

Mould growth to the kitchen, ground floor bathroom and first floor bathroom due

to lack of heating over winter months

1.5

The window handle to the left hand front

bedroom is broken

Issue 2 - Falling on Stairs

Originally Category 1 – Now reduced to Category 2

2.1

Handrail to second floor bedroom has become detached from the wall

Deleted 2.2

Carpet to the staircase of the second floor

bedroom is ripped and torn and currently

presents a trip hazard

Issue 3 - Personal Hygiene, Sanitation and Drainage

Originally Category 1 – Now reduced to Category 2

3.1

No hot water supply to the property

Deleted

3.2

Blocked drainage to the side alleyway drains Deleted

3.3

First floor bathroom wash hand basin is not

attached to the wall

Deleted

3.4

Missing tiles to the wall adjacent to the bath

of the ground floor bathroom

3.5

Broken extractor fan to the Ground floor

bathroom

Deleted

Issue 4 - Electrical hazards

Removed from Notice in its entirety

4.1

Lack of cover to the light in the first floor

bathroom

Deleted

4.2

Removal / tampering of the wires to the

fuseboard and the subsequent removal

of power to the first and second floor lights

and sockets for over 2 months

Deleted

Issue 5 - Food Safety

Category 2

5.1

Missing sections of worksurface to either

side of the cooker

Confirmed

3

5.2

Kitchen cupboard doors are hanging off Deleted

5.3

No watertight seal between the worksurface

and tiled splashback of the kitchen worktops Confirmed

2 Respondent's Claim for Costs

Confirmed

REASONS

Introduction

3 The property is a traditional 1930s two storey semi-detached house in Handsworth, Birmingham. It is of brick and tile construction with rendered front elevation and porch built as an extension to the front under a tiled canopy extending over the lounge bay window to the side.

4 The ground floor accommodation comprises a porch, hall, store cupboard, front reception room with door lock, rear reception room with bed and door lock, kitchen with boiler cupboard off, bathroom and rear conservatory.

5 The first floor has a landing, front and two rear bedrooms, each with a bed and door lock. There is a bathroom with bath, hand basin and w.c. A staircase leads to an attic which at the time of our inspection was used as a bedroom with three beds.

6 The property has a front garden with off-road parking for a car and lawn to the side with enclosed back garden.

7 On 14 February 2024 the Council served an Improvement Notice on [APPELLANT], the freeholder, identifying three Category 1 and two Category 2 hazards detailed in the paragraphs below. The Notice required remedial work to be completed by 8 April 2024.

8 The Council demanded charges of £366.94 for serving the Notice.

9 Mr [APPELLANT] appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) ('the Tribunal') on 7 April 2024.

10 The Tribunal issued Directions on 2 April 2024 requiring the Applicant to submit a statement of case by 31 May 2024. The Applicant did not comply so on 1 August 2024 the Tribunal issued a notice to potentially strike out the Application if the statement had not been received by 14 August 2024. The parties' statements were received and the Tribunal inspected the property on 14 November 2024.

11 The Tribunal inspected the property on 14 November 2024 in the presence of the tenant,

Ms [APPELLANT]. Neither the Applicant, Mr [APPELLANT], nor anyone from the Respondent attended.

12 The Tribunal inspected the property internally and externally in relation to the hazards identified in the Notice.

The Law 13 Under section 11(1) the Housing Act 2004 ('the Act'), a local housing authority has a duty to serve an improvement notice if it considers a category 1 hazards exist in relation to residential property to which the Act applies and no management order is in place. If the authority considers category 2 hazards exist they have a 'power' but no 'duty' to serve a Notice under section 12(2) of the Act.

4

14 The categories of hazard are listed in Schedule 1 to the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (England) Regulations 2005 ('the Regulations').

15 The Council served a Demand for Payment of a Charge for Enforcement Action under sections 49 and 50 of the Housing Act 2004.

16 On receipt of an Appeal, the Tribunal is required to reach its Decision by way of re-Hearing under section 15(2)(a) of Schedule 1, Part 3 of the Act and may by order confirm, quash or vary an improvement notice under section 15(3) of the Act.

Issues 17 The issues listed in the Improvement Notice are summarised as follows:

Issue 1 - Excess cold Category 1

1.1

Boiler not functioning

1.2

Unknown loft insulation

1.3

Dampness to second floor bedroom rear corner wall

1.4

Mould growth to the kitchen, ground floor bathroom and first floor

bathroom due to lack of heating over winter months

1.5

The window handle to the left hand front bedroom is broken

Issue 2 - Falling on Stairs

Category 1

2.1

Handrail to second floor bedroom has become detached from the wall 2.2

Carpet to the staircase of the second floor bedroom is ripped and torn

and currently presents a trip hazard

Issue 3 - Personal Hygiene, Sanitation and Drainage

Category 1

3.1

No hot water supply to the property

3.2

Blocked drainage to the side alleyway drains

3.3

First floor bathroom wash hand basin is not attached to the wall

3.4

Missing tiles to the wall adjacent to the bath of the ground floor

bathroom

3.5

Broken extractor fan to the Ground floor bathroom

Issue 4 - Electrical hazards

Category 2

4.1

Lack of cover to the light in the first floor bathroom

4.2

Removal / tampering of the wires to the fuseboard and the subsequent

removal of power to the first and second floor lights and sockets for

over 2 months

Issue 5 - Food Safety

Category 2

5.1

Missing sections of worksurface to either side of the cooker

5.2

Kitchen cupboard doors are hanging off

5.3

No watertight seal between the worksurface and tiled splashback of the

kitchen worktops

5

Submissions

18 As neither party requested a hearing the application was determined on the parties' submissions.

Applicant 19 Mr [APPELLANT] acknowledged the property needed modernisation and said that when he received the Notice he intended to work with Birmingham City Council to carry out improvements. On 30 January 2024 he attended a meeting at the property with his building contractor and Mrs [NAME], the Environmental Health Officer employed by Birmingham City Council, but unfortunately the meeting was unproductive and relations between the parties broke down.

20 When he became aware that the boiler was not working he arranged for contractors to attend but there was a delay while parts were ordered and he provided space heaters for the period.

The boiler had failed on 14 December 2023 which was partly due to the tenant's use of the property as apparently the tenant had allowed up to 15 other parties to reside at the property without Mr [APPELLANT]'s consent which had put strain on the building facilities. Indeed, during the Tribunal's own inspection, it was noted that several doors had been fitted with locks, there were several parties in occupation and the tenant, Ms [APPELLANT], advised that six persons were living at the property.

21 Mr [APPELLANT]'s electrician had attended at some point, date unknown, and found it necessary to disconnect part of the electrical circuit for safety reasons.

22 In Mr [APPELLANT]’s view, most of the lack of repair at the property was due to the tenant's lack of co-operation by failing to give access to the landlord's contractors, refusing to answer the door and allowing use of the property by unauthorised sub-tenants. Apart from the kitchen and bathroom, every other room in the house had been sublet to unauthorised tenants without Mr [APPELLANT]'s consent. This had resulted in excessive wear and tear on the building. Photographs submitted to the Tribunal showed the kitchen before the letting to [NAME] and its condition afterwards, with deterioration due to the tenant's neglect, misuse and failure to report repairs.

23 Mr [APPELLANT] said the tenant's behaviour made it impossible to carry out repairs.

Respondent 24 Mrs [RESPONDENT] for the Respondent advised that she had been allocated the case on 19 January 2024 after the Respondent received a report from the tenant that she had no hot water or electrical supply. The electrics had been disconnected in December 2023 although it is not clear from the submission whether all or just some of the circuits had been disconnected. She confirmed having attended a site inspection on 30 January 2024 with Mr [APPELLANT] and that relations between the parties had broken down.

25 She acknowledged that the landlord had provided a Gas Safe certificate dated 15 May 2023 confirming that the heating system was satisfactory at that date and that there was no harm to the occupants. She also confirmed having received a valid electrical certificate dated 18 May 2023 confirming the circuits to be satisfactory.

26 As the initial survey had been abandoned, Mrs [NAME] served a Notice of Intention to take Emergency Remedial Action under section 40 of the Housing Act 2004, on 7 February 2024.

27 Emergency access was gained on 9 February 2024 to reinstate the electrical supply to all circuits. The Respondent's Electrician advised that the consumer unit had been tampered with and reconnected the system to allow the boiler to be re-fired and reinstate power to the

6

first floor and attic. The Electrician's subsequent report advised that there had been no risk to the occupants.

28 On 14 February 2024 Mrs [APPELLANT] served an Improvement Notice on Mr [APPELLANT], based on her survey on 30 January 2024. The Notice identified the issues in paragraph 17 above and requested repairs to be carried out by 8 April 2024.

The Tribunal Findings on each issue

Issue 1

29 Excess cold

1.1 'Boiler not functioning'. By the date of the Tribunal inspection it had been reinstated to working order. This item is therefore deleted.

1.2 'Unknown loft insulation'. There was no evidence that Mrs [NAME] had accessed the loft or determined whether or not it was insulated, however the Applicant did not provide evidence that it was. From the tribunals experience it is considered that the roof space, which is over the attic room, is likely to contain minimal insulation. There was no evidence internally of any works to provide insulation, having been carried out.

1.3 'Dampness to second floor bedroom rear corner wall'. Reference to this damp should not have been made under this heading as Schedule 1 to the Regulations lists dampness under a separate heading. The source of damp ingress (as distinct from condensation) needs to be identified and repaired as a Category 2 issue.

1.4 'Mould growth to the kitchen, ground floor bathroom and first floor bathroom due to lack of heating over winter months'. The Tribunal notes that as the kitchen radiator is now working it may have alleviated the risk of damp and mould growth. However, it is noted and the Tribunal requires it to be attended to under a separate heading, as item 1.3, as a Category 2 issue.

1.5 'The window handle to the left hand front bedroom is broken'. The Tribunal agrees and requires replacement of the handle or whole unit if this is impossible, by the final date.

Issue 2

30 Falling on Stairs

2.1 'Handrail to second floor bedroom has become detached from the wall'. The handrail has been replaced. This item is deleted.

2.2 'Carpet to the staircase of the second floor bedroom is ripped and torn and currently presents a trip hazard'. The Tribunal agrees the issue.

Issue 3

31 Personal Hygiene, Sanitation and Drainage

3.1 'No hot water supply to the property'. The boiler has been reinstated. This item is deleted.

3.2 'Blocked drainage to the side alleyway drains'. The landlord's [NAME] advise that the blockage has been caused by the tenant's use of the property and the tribunal agrees that this is likely to have been the case. The landlord has a reasonable excuse and the item is therefore deleted.

3.3 'First floor bathroom wash hand basin is not attached to the wall'. During its inspection the tribunal noted that the wash hand basin was broken holed and unuseable. The

7

Tribunal finds this and the previous non attachment of the basin to the adjacent wall, is likely to have been caused by the tenant's use/misuse of the property and deletes this item.

3.4 'Missing tiles to the wall adjacent to the bath of the ground floor bathroom. The Tribunal finds the tiles need replacement.

3.5 'Broken extractor fan to the Ground floor bathroom'. The extractor was working at the date of the Tribunal's inspection. The item is therefore deleted.

Issue 4

32 Electrical hazards

4.1 'Lack of cover to the light in the first floor bathroom'. The light has been replaced and is in working order. The item is deleted.

4.2 'Removal / tampering of the wires to the fuseboard and the subsequent removal of power to the first and second floor lights and sockets for over 2 months'. The circuits have been reinstated by the Respondent's contractor and left in proper working order. The item is therefore deleted.

Issue 5

33 Food Safety

5.1 'Missing sections of worksurface to either side of the cooker'. The Tribunal finds that these sections of worksurface are missing and requires the Applicant to replace the worksurface to both sides of the cooker, re-seal and leave watertight joints.

5.2 'Kitchen cupboard doors are hanging off'. During its inspection the tribunal found that all the doors and drawer fronts to the base and wall units were present and suitably secure. The item is therefore deleted.

5.3 'No watertight seal between the worksurface and tiled splashback of the kitchen worktops'. The Tribunal finds that the seals between the worksurfaces and tiled splashback are either missing or in poor condition and requires the Applicant to re-seal the joints around the worksurfaces after the replacement works required in respect of item 5.1 above.

The Tribunal Findings on Remedial Action to be Carried Out

34 The Tribunal finds that the works associated with the remaining deficiencies (set out in paragraphs 29 to 33 above) listed on the Improvement Notice dated 14th February 2024, are relevant and should be undertaken by the Applicant, as part of the revised notice.

Compliance Date

35 The remedial action required in respect of the revised Improvement Notice should be started by the 19th May 2025 and be completed by 16th June 2025.

Fee

36 Fee for Service of Notice

The Tribunal has found some of the issues in the Notice valid, others varied and others removed. However, as the Respondent has served a Notice in respect of valid issues it is entitled to its fee of £366.94 as claimed which is found to be reasonable in the circumstances.

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

Chairman

8

Appeal

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, the Tenant / respondent 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, you should send your further application for permission to appeal by email to [EMAIL], as this will enable the Upper Tribunal ([NAME]) to deal with it more efficiently.

Alternatively, the Upper Tribunal ([NAME]) may be contacted 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 local housing authority provided sufficient evidence of imminent risk of serious harm.
  • The landlord had a reasonable excuse for non-compliance due to tenant actions.
  • The local housing authority imposed a financial penalty based on clear evidence of misconduct.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The issue pertained to the Right to Buy for properties suitable for elderly persons, unrelated to Improvement Notices.
  • The case involved a landlord's compliance with Improvement Notices to address disrepair issues, leading to dismissal.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal confirmed some issues and modified others in an Improvement Notice appeal, setting compliance dates and fees for the landlord.

Who was involved?

The landlord appealed an Improvement Notice served by the local housing authority.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to confirm some issues and modify others based on the Housing Act 2004 and the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (England) Regulations 2005.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 2004 and the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (England) Regulations 2005 were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the identification of Category 2 hazards in the residential property.

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

The decision was for the local housing authority.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should ensure compliance with the Improvement Notice and seek legal advice if necessary.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence and documents related to the condition of the property and the Improvement Notice were considered.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions 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 Improvement Notices.

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.