103 Great Brownings, London, SE21 7HR
Evidence considered
- No comparable evidence was considered; the case was struck out on jurisdictional grounds before any valuation evidence was assessed.
Tenant submitted evidence: no. Landlord submitted evidence: no.
Tribunal's reasoning
The Tribunal found it had no jurisdiction to determine a market rent under section 13 of the Housing Act 1988. The tenancy had become a contractual periodic tenancy after the fixed term ended, but it contained a binding rent review clause (linking rent to RPI changes) under clause 10.2. Section 13(1)(b) excludes periodic tenancies from section 13 where such a binding rent review provision exists, so the Landlord's Notice of Increase was invalid for these purposes and the application was struck out without any rent being determined.
Read the original decision (PDF, GOV.UK)
Want the evidence, not just the decision?
Around half of the decisions in this database cite a problem with the evidence submitted — comparable tribunal outcomes are usually what decides these cases, for both sides. We're testing a paid evidence pack and a guided walkthrough of the application, built from this database.
Landlord evidence pack — from £15
Nearby tribunal outcomes, a rent level likely to survive a challenge, and an evidence pack in the format the tribunal expects — timed for when you serve a section 13 notice.
Register interest in the landlord packTenant pack — from £19
Whether challenging your rent increase is worth it, plus the comparable decisions to include with your MR1 application to the tribunal.
Register interest in the tenant packNot built yet — register your interest by email and we'll let you know when it's ready. This isn't legal advice; see the law and free advice options.