Tenant Loses Challenge Over Late Section 13 Notice
📌 In brief
A tenant tried to challenge a rent increase using a Section 13 notice but failed because they submitted the notice too late. The Tribunal ruled they had no authority to hear the case due to timing issues.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant cannot refer a Section 13 notice to the Tribunal after the proposed new rent takes effect.
📖 What the law says
This section applies to certain types of assured periodic tenancies, excluding relevant low-cost tenancies. It allows landlords to serve a notice proposing a new rent to take effect at the beginning of a new period of the tenancy, which must begin at least two months after the date of the notice's service. Additionally, if the rent has previously been increased under this section, the next increase must take effect at least one year after the previous increase.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal lacks jurisdiction due to timing issues with the Section 13 notice.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to hear a tenant's challenge to a rent increase because the Section 13 notice was submitted after the proposed new rent had taken effect. Mr Charles Norman FRICS presided over the case.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Struck Out
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00BE/MNR/2020/0131 HMCTS code (paper, video, audio) : V: CVPREMOTE Property : 10 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : In person Respondent: [redacted] : No attendance Type of application : Section 13 Housing act 1988 Tribunal member(s) : [NAME] [NAME] : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 5 August 2021
DECISION
Covid-19 pandemic: description of determination This has been a remote determination. The form of remote determination was V: CVPREMOTE. A face-to-face hearing was not held because or it was not practicable. The documents that the Tribunal were referred to are in a bundle of 25 pages, the contents of which the Tribunal have noted.
Decision:
1. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine this application for the reasons stated below. The application is therefore STRUCK OUT. Background:
2. On 2 November 2020 the Tribunal received an application under section 13 of the Housing Act 1988.
3. The landlords’ section 13 notice proposed an increase in rent commencing on 1 November 2021. The landlord’s notice was dated 27 August 2021. The law:
4. Section 13(4) states: Where a notice [a notice of increase] is served …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 Tribunal]…” (emphasis added) In R. v London Rent Assessment Committee Ex p. [NAME] [2003] H.L.R. 787, CA. the Court of Appeal held that Refers in this context means “hands over” and not “sends”. It held that a notice sent by post before the date on which the new rent took effect, but which arrived at the rent assessment committee [the predecessor to the Tribunal] after that date, was ineffective: The Tribunal has no discretion to extend time under the Housing Act 1988. Facts found:
5. The section 13 notice was referred to the Tribunal after the date when the new proposed rent took effect. Reasons for the decision:
6.
Accordingly, the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to consider the notice of increase in rent.
Name: Mr [NAME] [NAME]: 5 August 2021
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. 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) Tenant Wins Challenge Against Invalid Notice of Rent Increase
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Fire Safety Works Dispensation Approved by First-tier Tribunal
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Boiler Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Landlord Dispensation from Consultation Requirem…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Entitled to Recover Reasonable Costs Under Lease Provisions
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Local Authority Secures Annual Site License Fee Order Against Non-compliant…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Emergency Remediation Works Approved Without Prior Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Management Company Granted Permission to Skip Consultation for Urgent Repai…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Permission for Urgent Works Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Repairs
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
- Works are considered urgent and necessary.
- There is no objection from the affected party.
- The situation requires immediate action to prevent further damage.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The claim involves a request to challenge a notice after the new rent has already taken effect.
- The issue pertains to costs recovery from a party outside the tribunal's jurisdiction.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal decided it had no jurisdiction to hear the case because the Section 13 notice was submitted after the proposed new rent had taken effect.
Who was involved?
The case involved a tenant and a landlord.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that it could not hear the case because the notice was submitted after the proposed new rent had taken effect, which is outside their jurisdiction.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988, specifically Section 13(4), was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the notice was submitted after the proposed new rent had taken 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 any Section 13 notice is submitted before the proposed new rent takes effect.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The date of submission of the Section 13 notice was crucial.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
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 legal challenges to rent increases.
