{"id":241,"date":"2021-09-15T14:00:29","date_gmt":"2021-09-15T13:00:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/getrentback.org\/blog\/?p=241"},"modified":"2021-09-15T14:00:31","modified_gmt":"2021-09-15T13:00:31","slug":"august-rro-decisions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/getrentback.org\/blog\/2021\/09\/15\/august-rro-decisions\/","title":{"rendered":"August RRO Decisions"},"content":{"rendered":"

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

August began under the shadow of the momentous Rakusen v Jepsen (Rakusen) <\/em>judgment made on the 29th of July, which stated tenants can only make claims against their immediate landlord.<\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

In consequence, many hearings scheduled for August, including those brought by Flat Justice, did not see the light of day, as Applicants hastily withdrew doomed claims against superior landlords.<\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Nonetheless, many Applicants still managed to win big in August.<\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

The spectre of Rakusen-Jepsen<\/strong><\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Even in successful RRO1 applications in August, Rakusen <\/em>loomed large.<\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

In Adjety V Kenneth Lloyds Limited & Ali, Mr Adjety made a claim against both their immediate landlord and their superior landlord. This approach – which Flat Justice had often employed prior to \u200bRakusen <\/em>– did not survive the opening moments of the hearing. Shortly after the hearing began, the Tribunal adjourned to consider Rakusen<\/em>. On returning, the Tribunal swiftly decided that a claim could only be made against the immediate landlord: Kenneth Lloyds Limited.<\/p>\n

Nonetheless, Mr Adjety won 100% of his rent back from Kenneth Lloyds Limited. So long as Kenneth Lloyds Limited pays the award, Mr Adjety will have triumphed. <\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

However, the worry is that in cases like these it might be cost effective for immediate landlords – who are limited companies – to liquidate and re-emerge in the form of phoenix companies. <\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Fingers crossed for you Mr Adjety!!<\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

In other cases, Judges made sure to confirm whether a Respondent was an \u2018immediate landlord\u2019. What hallmarks of an \u2018immediate landlord\u2019 did the Tribunal look for?<\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n
–<\/span>In Dos Santos and Gandara V L Hub London, the Tribunal identified the fact that L Hub London: \u2018is named as the landlord on the tenancy agreement\u2019 and \u2018that rent payments were made to the Respondent\u2019. <\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
–<\/span>in Zaric & ORS v J & G Home Share Limited & ORS <\/em>the Tribunal contrasted the \u2018First Respondent\u2019 who was \u2018the immediate landlord and the appropriate respondent\u2019 with \u2018the second and third Respondents\u2019 who were \u2018the freeholders’ and therefore a superior landlord. <\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
–<\/span>Somewhat contrastingly, in Mohamud V 9 Connaught Road Limited and Chadwell Holdings Limited (1) Brian Thomas Estate Agents (2), <\/em>Judge Abbey deemed that the first Respondents were appropriate Respondents on the basis that they \u2018are the owners of the property as listed on its registered title\u2019. The Tribunal further stated that \u2018Thomas Estate Agents\u2019 could not be a Respondent as they were merely a managing agent. The reason why the Tribunal decided that the owner of the property was the \u2018immediate landlord\u2019 rather than a \u2018superior landlord\u2019 is not addressed. Perhaps, the Tribunal is still willing to allow claims against the owners of a property where there is no appropriate candidate for a landlord further down the chain. <\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
–<\/span>There was a particularly interesting discussion about who is the \u2018immediate\u2019 and \u2018superior\u2019 landlord in Rodriquez & ORS v Mohammad Abdul Kalam (1) Joes Property Limited (2)<\/em>. In that case, the first Respondent Mr Kalam tried to argue that he was a \u2018superior landlord\u2019 on the basis that he had signed a lease with \u2018Globe Residential\u2019 – who he claimed were a \u2018rent-2-rent\u2019 agency. Following Rakusen, <\/em>one would have expected Mr Kalam\u2019s argument that \u2018Globe Residential\u2019 were the \u2018immediate landlord\u2019 to be successful. However, the Tribunal found that there was sufficient evidence that Mr Kalam still remained the \u2018immediate landlord\u2019. The Tribunal pointed to the fact that:<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\u25cf<\/span>The lease between Mr Kalam and Globe Residential was a \u2018sham agreement\u2019.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\u25cf<\/span>Globe Residential, as well as R2 (Joes Property Limited), were in fact managing agents of Mr Kalam.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\u25cf<\/span>Mr Kalam was named as the Applicants\u2019 landlord on their AST agreement. <\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Arrears hurt Rent Repayment Orders:<\/strong><\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

In Mohamud V 9 Connaught Road Limited and Chadwell Holdings Limited (1) Brian Thomas Estate Agents (2), <\/em>the Tribunal made a 5% deduction to the award based on the fact that the Applicant had rent arrears. The deduction was small as the arrears began outside the period applied for. However, the fact that the deduction was made, despite the arrears being outside the period applied for, is a further reminder that the Tribunal is not always strict in keeping its focus on the \u2018relevant period\u2019. <\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Similarly, there was a 15% reduction in Islam & Siwon V Madlani <\/em>owing to tenant arrears. However, in Islam <\/em>the arrears had occured during the period. <\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Deductions are a one way street?<\/strong><\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

In Reeves & Ors v Watson & Watson, <\/em>the Tribunal made a 10% deduction for good landlord conduct despite also finding evidence of extremely poor landlord conduct:<\/p>\n

\n
\n
1.<\/span>The deposits were not protected<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
2.<\/span>There was no hard-wired fire alarm<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
3.<\/span>Failure to repair a window that \u201cplaced the applicants at some risk<\/em>\u201d<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

All this despite the fact that the Respondent was judged by the Tribunal to have been a \u201clong-standing professional landlord<\/em>\u201d, so should normally have been dealt with more harshly for failing to license. Essentially, the deduction was made because there was no \u201cdeliberate flouting of the law by the respondents<\/em>\u201d…<\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

This is a somewhat concerning trend, in which the Tribunal reduces an award from 100% if there are ANY reasons to make deductions.<\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

We have always argued that if a Tribunal sees reasons to make a deduction, this must be balanced against reasons not to make a deduction.<\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

So if a landlord demonstrates equally good and bad conduct, the two would balance out, and there would be no deduction to an award.<\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

However, it seems that often, if the Tribunal sees a reason to come down from 100%, no amount of bad landlord conduct will lead them to come back up. <\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Sham licences are bad conduct! <\/strong><\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

In Zaric & ORS v J & G Home Share Limited & ORS, <\/em>the tribunal found \u2018that the landlord used a licence agreement which in the opinion of the tribunal was not appropriate\u2019. <\/p>\n

This, as the Tribunal noted, had \u2018consequences… It meant that the deposit was not protected when it should have been. It also meant that the applicants thought they had very limited security of tenure.\u2019<\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Summary of all cases in August 2021:<\/span><\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Case number & URL hyperlink<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Date of Decision<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Judge<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Respondent<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

\u200b\u200b \u200bApplicant Represented?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Respondent represented?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Offence(s)<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Rent paid by tenants in period of offence<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Award<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

% of rent<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

LON\/00BJ\/HMF\/2020\/0235<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

02\/08\/2021<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Judge R Abbey<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Balazs Stalter<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

No<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Did not attend<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unlicensed property<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

7020<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

7020<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

100%<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

LON\/00BB\/HMG\/2021\/0003<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

4\/08\/2021<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Tribunal member Anthony Harris<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

L Hub London<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

No<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Yes<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unlicensed property<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

15, 060<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

15, 060<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

100%<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

LON\/00BE\/HMF\/2020\/0184<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

05\/08\/2021<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Judge Brandler<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Bernard Properties LLP<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

No<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Yes<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unlicensed property<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

16, 800<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

16, 800<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

100%<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

CHI\/00MR\/HMF\/2021\/0010<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

05\/08\/2021<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Judge Cresswell<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Mr Anderson & Ms Anderson <\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Yes<\/span><\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

No<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unlicensed property <\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

1189.40<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

1016.20<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

85%<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

LON\/00AG\/HMB\/2021\/0001<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

10\/08\/2021<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Judge Dutton<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Ms Jessica Slamon<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

No<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Yes<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unlicensed property \/ Harassment\/ Illegal Eviction<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unclear<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

0<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

0%<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

LON\/00BG\/HMF\/2021\/0032<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

11\/08\/2021<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Judge Nicol<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Mr Derek Burgess<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Yes by Flat Justice<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Yes (by father not counsel)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unlicensed property <\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

6,300<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

6,300<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

100%<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

LON\/00AL\/HMF\/2021\/0030<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

12\/08\/2021<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Judge N Hawkes<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

(1) Kenneth Lloyds Limited (2) Mrs Aftaban Bibi Ali<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

No<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Yes<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unlicensed property<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

6, 240<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

6, 240<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

100%<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

LON\/00AN\/HMF\/2020\/0255<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

13\/08\/2021<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Judge Korn<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Mr Dilip Madlani<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Yes by Advice4Renters<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

No<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unlicensed property<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

8,100<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

6,579<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

81%<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

LON\/00BG\/HMF\/2021\/0075<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

19\/08\/2021<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Judge Brandler<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Mohammad Abdul Kalam (1) Joes Property Limited (2)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Yes<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

R(1) Yes<\/span><\/p>\n

R(2) No<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unlicensed property<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

20374<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

20374<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

100%<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

LON\/00BC\/HMJ\/2021\/0001<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

23\/08\/2021<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Judge Abbey<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

9 Connaught Road Limited and Chadwell Holdings Limited (1) Brian Thomas Estate Agents (2)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

No<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

R(1) Yes, R(2) No. <\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unlicensed property<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

8,520 (of which 7,284 was paid by the tenant, the rest was paid with UC)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

6920.51 <\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

95% (of\u200b\u200b rent paid by the Applicant themselves)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

LON\/00AL\/HMF\/2020\/0218<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

23\/08\/2021<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Judge Carr<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Naressh Gopal <\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

No<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

No<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unlicensed property<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

6000<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

5525<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

92.08%<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

LON\/00BE\/HMF\/2021\/0072<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

23\/08\/2021<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Judge Carr<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Mr. A. Watson and Ms. J. Watson.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unclear if Applicant self represented <\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Yes<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unlicensed property<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

25300<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

22683.60<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

90%<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

LON\/00BG\/HMF\/2021\/0035<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

31\/08\/2021<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Judge Dutton<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Mr Christopher Seymour<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

No<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

No<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unlicensed property<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

4550<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

4550<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

100%<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

LON\/00BG\/HMG\/2021\/0011<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

31\/08\/2021<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Judge Carr<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

J & G Home Share Limited (1) Abdul Hamid (2) Ataur Rahman (3)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Yes<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

No<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

Unlicensed property<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

\u00a324,073.69<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

24,073.69<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n

\n

100%<\/span><\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

. August began under the shadow of the momentous Rakusen v Jepsen (Rakusen) judgment made on the 29th of July, which stated tenants can only make claims against their immediate…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/getrentback.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/241"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/getrentback.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/getrentback.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/getrentback.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/getrentback.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=241"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/getrentback.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/241\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":244,"href":"https:\/\/getrentback.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/241\/revisions\/244"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/getrentback.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=241"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/getrentback.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=241"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/getrentback.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=241"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}