Tribunal Dismisses Rent Increase Application Due to Tenancy End
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal dismissed a rent increase application because the tenants had moved out and the tenancy had ended. This decision was based on Section 14(8) of the Housing Act 1988.
⚖️ Legal holding
The tribunal does not need to continue with a determination if the tenancy has ended.
📖 What the law says
This section allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. However, the application cannot be made if the rent is pursuant to a previous determination under this section or if more than six months have elapsed since the beginning of the tenancy.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal dismissed the application due to the tenancy's end.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal dismissed a rent increase application as the tenancy had ended, citing Section 14(8) of the Housing Act 1988.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Dismissed
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00BF/MNR/2022/0125 HMCTS Code (paper, video, audio) :
P: PAPERREMOTE
Property : 72B [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Tenant : [APPELLANT] and Edison Alves Landlord : Mr [RESPONDENT] of Application : Section 13 Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Members : Mr [NAME] [NAME] and venue of Consideration : 22 March 2023 at 10 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Date of Decision : 22 March 2023
DECISION The Tribunal will not determine this application for the reasons stated below.
Covid-19 pandemic: description of hearing This has been a remote hearing on the papers which has been consented to by the parties. The form of remote hearing was P:PAPERREMOTE. A face-to-face hearing was not held because one was not requested and all the issues could be dealt with on paper. The documents that the Tribunal were referred to are the application and
subsequent correspondence in an unstructured bundle, the contents of which have been noted.
REASONS
The Application 1. The Tribunal received an application from the Tenants, dated 27 July 2022. The application was received by the Tribunal on the same date.
2. The application referred a Landlord’s Notice of Increase that was in relation to 72B [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] (the subject property). The Notice of Increase was dated 30 June 2022 and proposed to increase the rent of the subject property from £1300 per month to £1400 per month with effect from 25 August 2022.
3. The Applicant tenant wrote to the tribunal on 1 February 2023 withdrawing the application as they no longer lived at the address. The Respondent landlord requested the tribunal continue with the case. The Law 4. The tribunal gains its jurisdiction to deal with rent increases of assured periodic tenancies (eg week to week or month to month) from section 13(1) of the Housing Act 1988. (the Act)
5. Section 14 of the Act deals with applications to the tribunal. Section 14(8) of the Act reads (emphasis added) Nothing in this section requires [the appropriate tribunal] to continue with their determination of a rent for a dwelling- house if the landlord and tenant give notice in writing that they no longer require such a determination or if the tenancy has come to an end. Facts Found 6. The subject property was let to the tenants who have now vacated and there is no continuing tenancy. The landlord has relet at a higher rent.
Discussion and Reasons for the Decision 7. The application has been withdrawn as the tenancy has come to an end. S14(8) of the Act does not require the tribunal to continue with a determination in these circumstances. The tribunal will not determine a rent. 8. To continue with the case would not be a proportionate use of the tribunal resources. Name: [NAME]: 22 March 2023
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 Defective Notice of Rent Increase
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Rejects Tenant's Appeal for Rent Increase Determination
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rejects Appeal for Rent Increase During Fixed Term
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rules Insurance Premiums Reasonable and Payable
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Upholds Reasonable Insurance Premium Claims
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant's Claim for Rent Increase Determination Rejected by Tribunal
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Successfully Challenges Invalid Rent Increase Notice
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Fair Rent for Statutory Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Lighting Works Without Consultatio…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for London Property
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 was not required to continue with the determination because the tenancy had ended.
- Continuing with the case would not be an efficient use of tribunal resources.
- The tenants had already vacated the property, meaning there was no ongoing tenancy.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord's request for the tribunal to continue with the case was not accepted.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tribunal dismissed the rent increase application because the tenancy had ended.
Who was involved?
The tenants had applied for a rent increase but later withdrew the application as they no longer lived at the address.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to dismiss the application because the tenancy had ended, as per Section 14(8) of the Housing Act 1988.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988, specifically Sections 13 and 14, were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the tenancy had ended, thus rendering the application moot.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
If a tenant no longer lives at the address and the tenancy has ended, any pending rent increase application will likely be dismissed.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The withdrawal letter from the tenants and the fact that the tenancy had ended were the key pieces of evidence.
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 legal matters.