Flat 28 Valentines House, 3 Fairmont Road, Rainham, Essex, RM13 8SA
Evidence considered
- Tenant submitted bank statements showing rent payments made on the 31st of the month to support her argument that the Notice's proposed increase date did not align with the rent payment date
- No comparable rental evidence was considered as the case was decided on jurisdictional grounds, not on valuation
Tenant submitted evidence: yes. Landlord submitted evidence: no.
Tribunal's reasoning
The Tribunal did not determine a market rent. The tenant's application challenging the Landlord's Notice of Increase was received one day after the new rent period began (31 May 2026, with the new period starting 30 May 2026), failing to meet the requirement under section 13(4) Housing Act 1988 that the application be made before the new period begins. As a result, the Tribunal found it had no jurisdiction and struck out the application under Rule 9(2)(a), meaning the landlord's proposed rent took effect automatically.
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.