24 Woodland Road, Maple Cross Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire, WD3 9SU
Evidence considered
No evidence details extracted.
Tenant submitted evidence: no. Landlord submitted evidence: no.
Tribunal's reasoning
The Tribunal did not determine a market rent. It found that the tenancy agreement contained a binding rent review clause (CPI-linked annual increase under clause 1.7.8) which brought the tenancy within section 13(1)(b) of the Housing Act 1988, excluding it from the section 13 notice procedure. As a result the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to consider the landlord's section 13 notice or to determine a market rent, and the application was struck out.
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.