18 Willes Terrace, Leamington Spa, CV31 1DL
BIR/44UF/HMK/2023/0006 · Warwick · decided 7 Oct 2024 · rent repayment order
old rules| Offence | Unlicensed HMO |
|---|---|
| Landlord | Individual |
| Applicants | 1 tenant |
| Rent | not stated as one figure |
| Period the order relates to | 2 Oct 2021 to 1 Oct 2022 |
| Maximum the tribunal could award | not stated as one figure (or not yet checked); £1,203.33 then deducted for utilities |
| Amount the tribunal ordered | £1,810.43 (1 applicant) |
| Share of the maximum | 35%, as the tribunal stated it |
| Tribunal fees to be reimbursed | £150 |
| Rules | Old rules (offence before 1 May 2026): maximum 12 months' rent. |
Read from the PDF automatically. Amounts are totals for the decision, across all its applicants; the maximum is left out of the statistics until it has been checked.
From the tribunal's reasons on the amount
affected by the Respondent’s conduct. In our view, this means we are not looking at conduct in isolation; we only look at conduct as it affects a financial award in the Applicant’s favour. … This approach strongly suggests that any conduct we take into account should be conduct that had a direct impact upon the Applicant. Our view is that neither we, nor the Applicant has a general responsibility to further penalise the Respondent for any proven misdemeanours that it is the responsibility of others to police. We have to be mindful of the fact that any Applicant for a rent repayment order is not being compensated for harm; he or she is receiving a windfall. … Conduct, however, that directly harms or disadvantages the Applicant is properly to be taken into account in determining a rent repayment award. Examples might be failure to provide accommodation that is up to standard, abuse, or anti-social behaviour. … Using this yardstick, our view is that none of the conduct alleged by the Applicant should be taken into account in fixing the rent repayment amount, as: a. (Para 28a) - We cannot agree that limiting the timings during which the heating was on can be misconduct. The Respondent was paying for all electricity, meaning the Applicant could have used secondary heating (at the Respondent’s cost) to alleviate the cold. …
An extract from the part of the decision that sets the amount. To keep people's names out, any sentence that might contain one is left out (marked …). The full reasons are in the original decision.
The original
Other rent repayment orders near CV31 1DL · Licensing schemes and register for CV31 1DL
Past decisions are not a prediction. The tribunal decides each case on its facts, including the landlord's and tenant's conduct.