Late Application Under Housing Act 1988 Rejected
📌 In brief
A tenant tried to challenge a rent increase using the Housing Act 1988, but their application was too late. The Tribunal had no choice but to reject it because the deadline had passed.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant's application under section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 must be submitted before the new rent takes effect.
📖 What the law says
This section of the Housing Act 1988 allows landlords to propose an increase in rent for assured periodic tenancies, provided they follow certain procedures. The notice proposing the new rent must be served to the tenant in a prescribed form and specify when the new rent will take effect, which must be at least two months after the notice is served.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction due to the late submission of the application.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal rejected a tenant's application under section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 due to the application being submitted after the proposed rent increase took effect.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Struck Out
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00BK/MNR/2021/0014 HMCTS Code (Paper, video, audio) :
P: PAPERREMOTE
Property : [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Tenant : Ms [APPELLANT] Landlord : [COMPANY] of Application : Section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Member : [NAME] and venue of Consideration : 8 November 2021 at 10, [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Date of Decision : 8 November 2021
DECISION The Tribunal does not jurisdiction to determine this application for the reasons stated below.
Covid-19 pandemic: description of hearing This has been a remote determination on the papers which was not objected to by the parties. The form of the determination was P:PAPERREMOTE. A face-to-face hearing was not held because it was not practical, no-one requested a hearing and all issues could be determined on the papers. The Tribunal were did not receive a bundle, but there were various documents that were included with the original application.
REASONS
The Application 1. The Tribunal received an application from the Tenant, Ms [APPELLANT], dated 21 October 2020. The application was received by the Tribunal on 21 October 2020. Although the application was made on the form related to section 22 of the Housing Act 1988, it was clear that this application related to a Landlord’s Notice of Increase that was served on the Tenant and therefore this was an application under section 13 of the Housing Act 1988.
2. The application referred a Landlord’s Notice of Increase that was in relation [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] (the subject property). The Notice of Increase was dated 18 May 2020 and proposed to increase the rent of the subject property from £833.oo per month to £862.16 per month with effect from 23 June 2020. The Law
3. Section 13(4) of the 1998 Housing Act states: “Where a Notice is served under sub-section 2 above a new rent specified in the Notice shall take effect as mentioned in the Notice unless before the beginning of the new period specified in the Notice: (a) the Tenant by an application in the prescribed form refers the Notice to the appropriate Tribunal; or (b) the Landlord and Tenant agree on a variation of the rent which is different from that proposed in the Notice or agree that the rent should not be varied Facts Found 4. The Tribunal received the application in the prescribed form referring the Notice of Increase on 21 October 2020. The date for the proposed increase in the rent was 23 June 2020.
5. The Notice of Increase and the accompanying letter was correctly addressed to Ms [NAME] at the subject property. Submissions 6. There have been no specific submissions from the parties. However, I note that in the papers sent by the Tenant, she made enquiries of [COMPANY] in respect of the Notice of Increase. She stated she did not receive the
Notice of Increase in the post and that she had only received a copy by email on 24 September 2021. Discussion and Reasons for the Decision 7. It is appreciated that Ms [NAME] has stated that she did not receive a copy of the Notice of Increase in the post and that she only received it by email in September 2020. The details on the Notice indicate that it had the correct postal address and the correct postcode. On the balance of probabilities, I find that the Notice was sent to the correct address. The Tribunal has no flexibility to accept any late application. This application was received by the Tribunal on 21 October 2020 after the date that the proposed rent was due to take effect, 23 June 2020. As a consequence the Tribunal has no jurisdiction.
8. It is noted that the Tenant has made another application that referred the 2021 Notice of Increase to the Tribunal. That case has already been determined under case reference number LON/00BK/MNR/2021/0133.
Name: Ms [NAME]: 8 November 2021
ANNEX - 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 (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. Any appeal in respect of the Housing Act 1988 should be on a point of law.
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) Tribunal Rejects Tenant's Appeal for Rent Increase Determination
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Rejects Defective Notice of Rent Increase
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rejects Appeal for Rent Increase During Fixed Term
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Dismisses Rent Increase Application Due to Tenancy End
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Rejects Late Application for Rent Increase Appeal
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Rejects Excessive Rent Claim After Six Months
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Successfully Challenges Invalid Rent Increase Notice
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Orders Service Charge Variation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Tenancy Based on Market Value
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment for Assured Tenancy: First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Safety 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 that it had no jurisdiction to hear the tenant's application because it was submitted after the proposed rent increase took effect.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that it lacked jurisdiction because the application was submitted after the proposed rent increase took effect, as required by the Housing Act 1988.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988, specifically section 13, was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the application was submitted after the proposed rent increase took effect.
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 that their application is submitted before the proposed rent increase takes effect.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The date of the application and the date of the proposed rent increase were critical.
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 property law.
