27 Hadley Road, Mitcham, CR4 1NW
Evidence considered
No evidence details extracted.
Tenant submitted evidence: unknown. Landlord submitted evidence: unknown.
Tribunal's reasoning
The Tribunal declined jurisdiction and struck out the application. The landlord's Notice of Increase appeared defective, as it proposed a new rent to take effect before the required statutory minimum notice period had elapsed. Following Mooney v Whiteland [2023] EWCA Civ 167, the Tribunal held that disputes over the validity of a Notice of Increase are a matter for the County Court, not the Tribunal, and therefore it had no jurisdiction to determine a market rent in this case. No rent was determined; the application was struck out under Rule 9(2)(a).
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.