Tenant's Rent Increase Appeal Rejected Due to Defective Notice
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal rejected a tenant's request to reassess their rent because the notice of rent increase was not properly formatted according to the Housing Act 1988.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant's application to assess a market rent can only be determined if the notice of rent increase is valid under the Housing Act 1988.
📖 What the law says
This section applies to certain types of assured periodic tenancies, excluding relevant low-cost tenancies. To secure an increase in rent, a landlord must serve a notice in a prescribed form proposing a new rent to take effect at the start of a new period of the tenancy. The new period must begin at least two months after the notice is served. If the rent has been previously increased, the next increase must occur on specific dates depending on the type of tenancy.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal lacks jurisdiction to assess a market rent due to a defective notice of rent increase.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) dismissed a tenant's application to assess a market rent due to a defective notice of rent increase, which failed to comply with the requirements set forth in the Housing Act 1988.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Dismissed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2022
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : MAN/00BN/MNR/2021/0061 Property : 36 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] Representative : [COUNSEL] Respondent : [redacted] Representative : Mrs [COUNSEL], [NAME] of application : Decision in relation to section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 Tribunal member(s) :
Judge J O White Valuer Ms S Latham Venue : Property Chamber, Northern Residential Property first-tier Tribunal, 1st floor, Piccadilly Exchange, 2 Piccadilly Plaza, Manchester, [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 24 May 2022
DECISION
2 Decision: The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine this application for the reasons stated below. Background:
1. On 24 June 2021 [NAME[NAME] sent a notice of rent increase to [NAME]. On 6 July 2021, [NAME] made an application under section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 (the Act), disputing the increase and asking the tribunal to assess the market rent.
2. On 14 July 2021 the tribunal wrote to the parties stating that the notice proposing a rent increase may be defective, as it does not appear to take effect at the commencement of a new period of the tenancy and asking the parties if they wished to request a hearing, otherwise the tribunal was satisfied the preliminary issue could be determined on the papers. The tenant requested a hearing. The landlord did not respond. The law:
3. The tribunal must strike out an application in accordance with Rule 9(2)(a) of the Tribunal Procedure (First Tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013 if it does not have jurisdiction to determine an application. Alternatively, Rule 9(2)(b) gives it the power transfer the matter to another court if they do have jurisdiction in accordance with 6(n).
4. A landlord must service any notice to increase rent, in accordance with S13(2) Housing Act 1988 (the Act) as amended if the tenancy is an assured periodic tenancy. The notice of increase must be in the prescribed form in accordance with S13(2) of the Act. The prescribed form is “Form 4 Landlord’s Notice proposing a new rent under an Assured Periodic Tenancy of premises situated in England”. The date the new rent is to take effect must be the beginning of a new period of the tenancy and this must be correctly specified in the notice. The notice period for the increase cannot be less than the minimum period set out in s13(3). In the case of a weekly or monthly tenancy this cannot be less than a month.
5. On receipt of the prescribed notice and before the beginning of the increase in rent a tenant may make an application to this tribunal in accordance with 13(4) of the Act. This application to determine a market rent is to be heard by the tribunal in accordance with s14 of the Act.
6. Rent can only otherwise be increased by virtue of any rent review clause in the tenancy or varied by agreement between the landlord and tenant as set out in s13(5) of the Act.
3 The hearing:
7. On 24 May 2022, the tenant’s brother and representative attended an oral hearing with his sister. The landlord did not attend.
8. The tribunal found the facts set out below. These were not in dispute. The landlord had made no representations. The tribunal was able to make an oral determination for the reasons set out below. Facts found:
9. In around 1976, [APPELLANT] father become the protected tenant of 36 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] ([NAME]). On 24 March 2006 [APPELLANT] became the tenant, by way of succession, on the death of his father. He has resided at [NAME] ever since. There are no services provided. [NAME] is unfurnished. There is no written tenancy agreement.
10. The landlord is [RESPONDENT[NAME]. He completed the prescribed Form 4 dated 24 June 2021, proposing a new rent of £1150 per month from 4 August 2021. The current rent is £540 per month. The last rent increase was on 24 July 2017. Reasons for the decision:
11. It is not in dispute that [NAME] is an assured periodic tenant. He was a family member of a regulated tenant who had resided at [NAME] for at least two years before the death of his father. As such s13 of the Act applies.
12. By Section 13 (2) and (3)(c) the new rent is to take effect at the beginning of a new period of the tenancy, not earlier than the period in the tenancy, which in this case is one month. As the prescribed form is dated 24 June 2006 and the tenancy start date is 24 March 2006, the start date of 4 August 2021 is not “the beginning of a new period” as required by the Act and so is invalid.
13. The tribunal only has jurisdiction to determine an application to assess the market rent if the notice to increase rent is a valid one under s13 of the Act. As the notice is defective the proposed increase in rent cannot be a valid increase. Consequently, the tribunal has no jurisdiction to determine the application to assess a market rent or to transfer it to another court.
14. In accordance with 13(4) of the Act the rent remains at £540 per calendar month. It can only be altered by agreement or by a subsequent valid notice; that can in turn be determined by the tribunal following any new application.
Name: Judge White Date: 27 May 2022
4
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, [NAME] 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 Found Guilty of Multiple Lease Breaches
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Electrical Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Reasonable Costs for Right to Manage Propert…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Urgent Repairs Dispensation Without Conditions
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Allowed to Upgrade Security Without Full Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Urgent Lift Repairs Dispensation in First-tier Tribunal Ca…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Roof Inspection Without Consultation
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 tribunal lacked the authority to decide the application because the rent increase notice was not valid.
- The rent increase notice was invalid because the proposed new rent date did not align with the start of a new tenancy period.
- The tenant's current rent of £540 per month remains in effect because the notice was invalid.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tribunal decided it lacked jurisdiction to assess the market rent due to a defective notice of rent increase.
Who was involved?
The case involved a tenant and a landlord.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the notice of rent increase was invalid because it did not specify the correct start date for the new rent as required by the Housing Act 1988.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988 and 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 notice of rent increase was defective and therefore the tribunal had no jurisdiction to assess the market rent.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the tenant who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure that any notice of rent increase complies with the relevant statutory requirements to avoid having their application struck out.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The prescribed Form 4 notice of rent increase was the key document in this case.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) if permission is granted.
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 rent increases and applications to the tribunal.
