Apartment 88, 1 Blantyre Street Manchester, M15 4JU
Evidence considered
- No comparable evidence was considered as the application was struck out on jurisdictional grounds before any substantive valuation hearing.
Tenant submitted evidence: no. Landlord submitted evidence: no.
Tribunal's reasoning
The application was struck out for lack of jurisdiction rather than determined on its merits. The tenancy agreement provided that, after expiry of the fixed term, the tenancy continued as a contractual periodic tenancy with its own contractual rent review mechanism, and expressly excluded the operation of section 13 of the Housing Act 1988. As the Tribunal's jurisdiction under section 13 had been validly contracted out of, it had no power to determine a market rent, and representations from both parties did not alter this conclusion.
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.