Social Housing Case Bulletin

Welcome to the May issue of our case law update

Our social housing team are delighted to share recent cases from the higher jurisdiction courts in England and Wales that are relevant to the social housing sector.

We trust that this update will be helpful and we welcome any queries or further help that we can provide by contacting the partners mentioned below.

Keeping abreast of the latest case law is an important aspect of advice to our clients in delivering the highest quality legal services and we trust you will find this a useful update within your business.

ASP Independent Living Ltd v Godfrey

[2021] UKUT 313 (Lands Chamber)

14 December 2021

Landlord and tenant – Service charges – Reasonableness

The Appellant landlord challenged three decisions of the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) in relation to the reasonableness of charges for the provision of a warden and gardening services. The FTT decisions were set aside and remitted to the FTT for proper consideration as they were unexplained and incoherent. The FTT would need to determine the nature of the agreement that governed the provision of services, whether it was a qualifying long-term agreement (QLTA) and, if it was, whether the landlord’s application for dispensation from consultation requirements should be allowed. If it was not a QLTA, the FTT would have to decide whether the charge was reasonable and whether a sufficient challenge to the reasonableness had been made. Read transcript

Chow & Anor v Skipper & Anor

[2022] UKUT 5 (Lands Chamber)

10 January 2022

Housing – Rent repayment order – Reasonable excuse – Amount of award

The Appellant landlords challenged a decision of the First-tier tribunal (FTT) making a rent repayment order (RRO) against them and awarding £11,012 to the Respondent tenants. The Respondents had notified the Appellants that their licence to manage a house of multiple occupation under the Housing Act 2004 was due to expire, but the renewal had not taken place. There were two grounds of appeal; that the FTT seemed to have concluded that it did not have discretion to award less than the maximum amount; and that the FTT might have based its decision on an incomplete understanding of the facts. Fresh evidence was admitted showing that the Appellants had attempted to renew the licence but had instead renewed the licence for one of their other properties by mistake. The level of RRO award was a harsh for clicking the wrong button. The FTT had made its decision under a misapprehension. The appeal succeeded and the FTT decision was set aside. Read transcript

Golding v Martin

Case No: C01BR087, Central London County Court

25 January 2022

Landlord and tenant – Possession – Leaseholders – Forwarding address

The Defendant was the lessee of a flat held under a long lease. The lease included an obligation to pay a service charge, which was reserved as rent. Under the terms of the lease, it was liable to forfeiture if the rent remained unpaid for 21 days. The Defendant had moved abroad, leaving her flat unoccupied, leaving no forwarding address. Her long-term plan was to keep the flat for her retirement. In her absence, relatives kept an eye on the flat for her. Due to the Defendant’s absence, the service charges ran into arrears and the Claimant began possession proceedings. The Claimant lawfully recovered possession by re-entry and ended the lease. The application for relief from forfeiture was made too late. The counterclaim for damages for unjust enrichment failed. Read transcript

Kaszowska & Ors v White

[2022] UKUT 11 (Lands Chamber)

14 January 2022

Housing – Rent Repayment Order – Director of a company landlord

The main issue in this appeal was whether a rent repayment order (RRO) made under the Housing and Planning Act 2016 could be made against the director of a corporate landlord who had committed an offence to which Chapter 4 of the Act applied. The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) decided that it did not have jurisdiction to make such an order. The only person against whom s.40(2) of the 2016 Act permitted an RRO to be made was a landlord. Had Parliament intended the scope of the orders to extend to company directors it would have specified as much. The FTT had not erred in concluding that had no jurisdiction to make an RRO against the Defendant. Appeal dismissed. Read transaction

L & Q Housing Trust -v- Oluwole

Case No: G03CL048, Bromley County Court

8 December 2021

Anti-social behaviour – Direct threats of violence – Sentencing

The Defendant had committed breaches of an anti-social behaviour order, including making very serious direct threats of violence to neighbours. Concurrent sentences were given for the infractions, for the most serious of which eight months imprisonment was handed down. The seriousness of the breaches meant that the sentence would not be suspended. Read transaction

Metropolitan Housing Trust Ltd v TM

[2021] EWCA Civ 1890, Court of Appeal

20 December 2021

Landlord and tenant – Possession – Public Sector Equality Duty

The Appellant tenant, who suffered with serious mental health difficulties, occupied a property owned by the Respondent Housing Trust under a supported living arrangement. The Appellant’s behaviour had ultimately led to possession proceedings being initiated. The Respondent had breached its Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) under the Equality Act 2010 by not taking into account an up-to-date psychiatric report, however, this had been deemed to have been remedied by the Respondent’s decision-maker testifying at trial. There were two grounds of appeal: that the Judge had been wrong to find that the Respondent had corrected their breach of PSED; and that Judge was wrong to uphold an order for possession where the Respondent had breached the PSED and their own evidence was that it would have reached a different decision if the breach had not occurred. The Respondent’s breach of the PSED had not been remedied in the witness box. Ground 1 of the appeal was well-founded. Appeal allowed. Read transaction