Tenant Secures Rent Repayment Order Against Landlord
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal granted a rent repayment order to a tenant because the landlord breached the law. The order requires the landlord to pay £8,800 to the tenant.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a rent repayment order if the landlord breaches the law.
📖 What the law says
The First-tier Tribunal can issue a rent repayment order if they are convinced, beyond any reasonable doubt, that a landlord has broken a law covered by this act. The order can only be issued based on an application made under section 41.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal granted a rent repayment order to the tenant.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal granted a rent repayment order to the tenant due to the landlord's breach of law. The order requires the landlord to pay £8,800 to the tenant.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AL/HMF/2025/0605 Property : [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : Not represented Respondent : [redacted] : Mr. [COUNSEL]. Taylor of [NAME] of application : Application for a rent repayment order by tenant Tribunal : Judge S.J. Walker Tribunal Member [NAME] and Venue of Hearings : 11 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of Decision : 9 September 2025
DECISION
Pursuant to its powers under rule 35 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal)(Property Chamber) Rules 2013 and with the consent of the parties the Tribunal makes a Rent Repayment Order under section 43 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 requiring the Respondent to pay the sum of £8,800 to the Applicant.
2 Reasons The Application 1. The Applicant seeks a rent repayment order pursuant to sections 43 and 44 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 (“the Act”) for the period from 6 April 2023 to 4 March 2024 in the sum of £8,800. The Hearing 2. The hearing was conducted face-to-face. The Applicant attended and was not represented. The Respondent attended and was represented by Mr. [RESPONDENT] of [NAME].
3. At the beginning of the hearing the Tribunal was informed that the parties were in the course of discussions and further time was requested for these to take place in the hope that an agreement could be reached.
4. After providing additional time for these discussions, the hearing finally commenced.
5. The Tribunal was informed by Mr. [NAME] that the parties had been unable to reach an agreement. He then went on to inform the Tribunal that the Respondent wished to bring an end to the matter immediately. He said that in the circumstances the Respondent no longer wished to resist the application and would consent to an order being made for the sum sought.
The Tribunal’s Decision 6. Although the Applicant in the section of his skeleton argument entitled remedy (paras 51 to 53) invited the Tribunal to make an award of compensation, this is not something which the Tribunal has jurisdiction to do. The most the Tribunal could do was to make an order in the sum requested.
7. In the light of the Respondent’s decision not to contest the application and the further indication that they would consent to an order being made for the sum sought, the Tribunal concluded that, in effect, it was being invited to make a consent order under its powers set out in rule 35 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013 (“the Rules”).
8. Rule 35 allows the Tribunal to make an order at the request of the parties disposing of the proceedings if it considers it appropriate to do so. Given the fact that the sum sought was the maximum it could award to the Applicant, and given the clearly expressed position of the Respondent, the Tribunal decided that it was appropriate to make the order sought.
Name: Judge S.J. Walker Date: 9 September 2025
3
ANNEX - RIGHTS OF APPEAL
• The Tribunal is required to set out rights of appeal against its decisions by virtue of the rule 36 (2)(c) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal)(Property Chamber) Rules 2013 and these are set out below.
• If a party wishes to appeal against 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.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 11 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Freehold Purchase Price
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Halts Market Rent Determination Until Valid Notice Confirmed
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Management Company Allowed Urgent Lift Repairs Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Reviews Pitch Fee Increase Based on CPI
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Claimant Successfully Obtains Right to Manage Premises
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Price for Freehold Purchase When Landlord Untracea…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment for Assured Tenancy: First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Works on Residential Estate
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 respondent consented to the order being made for the sum sought by the applicant.
- The Tribunal was invited to make a consent order under its powers.
- The sum sought by the applicant was the maximum the Tribunal could award.
- The Tribunal found it appropriate to make the order sought, given the respondent's clear position.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The decision granted a rent repayment order to the tenant.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the tenant because the landlord breached the law.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Section 43 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 and Rule 35 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 landlord breached the law, entitling the tenant to a rent repayment order.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may also be entitled to a rent repayment order if their landlord breaches the law.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence and documents presented during the hearing likely included proof of the landlord's breach of law.
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 rent repayment orders.
