Late Application for Reviewing Excessive Rents Rejected by Tribunal
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) dismissed an application to review excessive rents because it was submitted too late, more than six months after the tenancy started.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant cannot make an application to the Rent Tribunal to review excessive rents under section 22 of the Housing Act 1988 if the tenancy began more than six months ago.
📖 What the law says
Under the Housing Act 1988, section 22 allows a tenant to apply to the appropriate tribunal for a determination of an excessive rent if certain conditions are met. However, no application can be made if more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy, especially if the tenancy is an assured shorthold tenancy.
Section 19A of the Housing Act 1988 defines an assured shorthold tenancy as one that is entered into on or after the day the Housing Act 1996 comes into force, unless it falls within any paragraph in Schedule 2A of the Act.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to hear an application regarding excessive rents under the Housing Act 1988 if the tenancy began more than six months prior.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) rejected an application to review excessive rents under section 22 of the Housing Act 1988 due to the application being made more than six months after the tenancy began.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Struck Out
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AM/MDR/2021/0022 Property : 27 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicants : [redacted] Ms [RESPONDENT] Landlord : [RESPONDENT] of application : Decision in relation to section 22(1) of the Housing Act 1988 Tribunal members :
Mr [NAME] [NAME] of decision : 5th April 2022
DECISION
The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine this application for the reasons stated below
This has been a determination on the papers which has been consented to/not objected to by the parties. A face-to-face hearing was not held, because all issues could be determined on paper and there was no request for a hearing. We considered various documents that are detailed in the Decision below. The order made is described at the end of these reasons. There was no objection from either party in proceeding in this manner. Decision: The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine this application for the reasons stated below. Background and issues:
1. The tribunal received an application under section 22 of the Housing Act 1988 ('the Act') on 29th September 2021. The case was reviewed by the Tribunal and it was identified that the application referred to an assured shorthold tenancy which commenced on 16th January 2021.
2. The tribunal received on 2nd November 2021 an e mail from the Landlord which stated “as Respondents in this application we have now amicably come to an agreement on the disputed terms with the applicant (tenants) and therefore the now wish to discontinue the application.” 3. The tribunal subsequently e mailed the parties seeking their confirmation that the application was withdrawn. No response to this request was received from either the applicants or respondents. The law:
4. The statutory provisions relating to the reference by a tenant of “excessive rents” to a Rent Tribunal for determination are contained in section 22 of the Act. The Act states that: 1) “The tenant under an assured shorthold tenancy may make an application in the prescribed form to the Rent Tribunal for a determination of the rent which in the Rent Tribunals opinion the landlord might be reasonably be expected to obtain under the assured shorthold tenancy 2) No application may be made under this section if- (aa) the tenancy is one to which section 19A applies and more than 6 months have elapsed since the beginning of the tenancy” 5. By Section 19 A of the Act tenancies to which section 22 applies are defined as assured shorthold tenancies created after 28th February 1997 6. Rule 9(2)(a) of the Tribunal Procedure(First Tier) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013 will apply if the tribunal does not have jurisdiction in relation to the proceedings or any part of them. Should the tribunal not have jurisdiction then they must strike out the whole or a part of the proceedings or case.
Facts found:
7. The tenant's assured shorthold tenancy agreement commenced on 16th January 2021. The application to tribunal is made on 29th September 2021.
8. The tenancy of the property commenced after the 28th February 1997.
9. The applicants failed to respond to the Directions of the tribunal in this matter. They were asked to corroborate the application withdrawal request made by the Landlord respondents which they failed to do. Reasons for the decision:
10. This assured shorthold tenancy created after 28th February 1997 is subject to section 19a of the Act. A tenant of an assured shorthold tenancy subject to section 19a of the Act may only make a valid application to tribunal to review excessive rent during the period six months from the commencement of the tenancy.
11. This application to tribunal is made on 29th September 2021 some 9 months after the tenancy commenced and is out of time. The statutory timetable for making a valid rent determination application to tribunal cannot be varied by tribunal.
12. The tribunal therefore has no jurisdiction to determine the rent.
13. The tribunal strike out the application.
Name: [NAME]: 5th April 2022
Valuer Chairman
Rights of appeal By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property 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), 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 (ie, 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. If the Tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application 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 Determines Freehold Premium
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Varies Prohibition Order to Allow Residence
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Right to Manage Over Premises
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins: Incorrect Rent Increase Notice Invalidated
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Freeholder Granted Dispensation for Emergency Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation from Consultation Requirements for …
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Helibar Works Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Allowed to Skip Consultation for Urgent Cladding Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rules on Lease Breaches
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy: Case Summary
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Lift Works
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal decided it had no jurisdiction to hear the application because it was filed too late.
Who was involved?
The application was made by tenants and opposed by the landlord.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that it lacked jurisdiction because the application was made more than six months after the tenancy began.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Section 22 of the Housing Act 1988 and Rule 9(2)(a) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the application was made outside the six-month window allowed by the Housing Act 1988.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the tenants.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure their application is made within the six-month window from the start of the tenancy.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The dates of the tenancy start and the application submission were crucial.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, but permission to appeal must be sought within 28 days of receiving the written reasons for the decision.
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 complex legal matters.
