Tribunal Rent Case And HMO Rulings Update

A buy-to-let tenant who challenged an unfair rent rise was awarded a £100 a month discount after taking the case to a property tribunal.

The First Tier Tribunal heard that landlords Toyin and Mobolanle Sodunke sought to increase the rent at the house in Thamesmead, South London, from £1,400 to £1,750 per month.

The tenant, Anthonia Iyio, argued that the proposed rise was too much and took the dispute to the tribunal. She told the tribunal that she should pay less as she had improved her home by replacing door and window handles, a smoke alarm, and a towel rail.

The tribunal decided that a fair rent was £1,700 a month, reducing the rent requested by the landlords to £1,650 a month to account for the tenant's maintenance, improvements, and fair wear and tear.

Read the full judgment

Landlords confused over HMO rules

Landlords Ketan and Shwetaben Gohil claimed they had not applied for an additional house in multiple occupation (HMO) licence because they believed the tenants sharing a house in Feltham, Middlesex, were related.

The landlords argued they only needed the additional licence from Hounslow Council, West London, if more than one family lived in the house.

However, the tenants were all unrelated and told the First Tier Tribunal they had never informed their landlords otherwise.

The judge, Sarah McKeown, said that even if the tenants were two couples and that two were related, this would not be a defence.

"The lack of a licence was due to the landlords' misunderstanding of the law. In addition to this, the property was advertised as a three-bedroom property, and the tribunal finds that it was made clear by the applicants that they would need three bedrooms," she said.

The tribunal found that the Gohils rented out the house without a licence and imposed a rent repayment order for £11,250 with £320 costs.

Read the full judgment

Ignorance of HMO law is no excuse for 92-year-old landlord

A judge imposed a £9,360 rent repayment order on a 92-year-old landlord who rented out an HMO without a licence in Ealing, West London.

The First Tier Tribunal heard that the landlord, Terence Hillman, owned several letting properties but did not actively manage them due to his age.

Instead, he delegated the role to his friend and agent, Mr Hattersley, who was in his 80s.

Hillman's lawyer told the First Tier Tribunal in their absence that neither was aware of the latest legislative or regulatory requirements for landlords. He added that Hillman admitted the offence of renting out an unlicensed HMO.

The tribunal disagreed that Hillman had a reasonable excuse for committing the offence, as Mr Hattersley was responsible for the day-to-day management of the property but, as the landlord, should have been aware of any legal requirements affecting his property business.

Hillman was ordered to pay a rent repayment order of £9,360 plus £320 costs to his tenants.

Read the full judgment