Ahmed & Ors v Murphy

A protected furnished tenancy cannot be converted into an unprotected or market-rent tenancy by the landlord’s change of intention. A tenant must provide reasonable access for reasonably required repairs, but is not obliged to permit improvements or refurbishment without agreement on appropriate terms.

To disapply the statutory cap on a fair-rent increase where works were prevented by refusal of access, the landlord must establish the prescribed six-stage causal analysis. The rent-capping formula must compare indices expressed on a common base; a later rebasing requires arithmetic adjustment of the earlier published figure. An appeal court may determine the issue itself where the material facts are documentary and remittal would be disproportionate.

The landlords appealed under section 11 of the Tribunals and Inquiries Act 1992 against the London Rent Assessment Committee’s determination of the maximum fair rent for the respondent’s furnished protected tenancy.

The rent officer had registered a fair rent of £90 per week and treated the tenancy as exempt from the statutory cap. The Committee treated the cap as applicable and ultimately registered £8.50 per week. The appeal concerned the tenant’s status, the adequacy of the Committee’s reasons, the effect of alleged refusal of access for repairs and improvements, construction of the rent-capping formula, fair-rent assessment, and the effective date of registration.

1. Tenancy and jurisdiction. The 1974 weekly furnished tenancy remained a protected tenancy governed by the Rent Act 1977. The statutory protection and rent regime could not be contracted out of or displaced because the landlords considered it commercially unattractive.
2. Reasons. A specialist rent committee may give brief and informal reasons reflecting its expertise and the nature of the hearing. Its reasons must nevertheless disclose the crucial factual findings and how they were applied to the law. The general complaint about inadequate reasons failed, but the Committee’s treatment of the paragraph (7) exemption was inadequately reasoned.
3. Access and exemption. Under sections 8, 10 and 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlords had to undertake essential repairs but were not entitled unilaterally to carry out improvements or extensive refurbishment. The tenant had to provide reasonable access for reasonably required repairs after reasonable notice and arrangements for necessary disturbance, storage or temporary accommodation. The landlords’ request was premised on the erroneous contention that the tenant had no protected rights and extended to non-essential works. The tenant’s counter-proposals were reasonable and did not amount to refusal.
4. To obtain exemption from the cap despite works not being carried out, the landlords had to establish: reasonable requested access; unreasonable refusal; an obligation to provide access for the identified works; that the works would otherwise have been completed before determination; the resulting difference in fair rent; and a difference of at least 15 per cent of the proposed increase. The landlords failed to establish the necessary foundation.
5. Formula. The Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999 required the relevant indices to be compared on a common base. The Committee erred by using the unrebased June 1984 figure against the rebased January 2009 figure. Applying the rebasing coefficient of 0.2534854 produced a maximum fair rent of £12 per week.
6. Fair rent and remedy. The Committee was entitled to discount for disrepair and scarcity. Its sparse reasons did not justify remittal because the fair rent was no longer decisive once the maximum fair rent was calculated from the existing registered rent. The court could determine the issue itself on the documentary material under CPR 52.10(2).
7. The appeal was allowed in part. The maximum fair rent was directed to be registered at £12 per week with effect from 3 June 2009. In all other respects the appeal was dismissed. There was no order as to costs.

The statutory appeal was brought from the London Rent Assessment Committee under section 11 of the Tribunals and Inquiries Act 1992. The High Court (Administrative Court) allowed the appeal in part, varied the maximum fair rent to £12 per week with effect from 3 June 2009, and dismissed the appeal in all other respects.