John Campbell v Giuseppina Cammarano & Ors

A First-tier Tribunal may review its own decision only within the statutory limits and in relation to a specific matter. Where the alleged error concerns an unfair hearing, a submissions-only review will rarely cure the defect, particularly where factual evidence was not tested and the original tribunal has already reached its conclusion. The proper course is ordinarily to set the decision aside and rehear the matter. In assessing a rent repayment order, the tribunal must make findings of fact on the evidence. Expressions of concern, potential hazards, or matters outside the parties’ cases do not replace findings. Housing-condition matters should not influence quantum where the property has been licensed despite them, unless proved facts show relevant failures indicating that it could not be licensed.

Former tenants applied to the First-tier Tribunal for rent repayment orders under sections 40 and following of the Housing and Planning Act 2016, alleging that their HMO required a licence but was unlicensed. The FTT made orders totalling £15,916.95 against John Campbell, finding that he was the landlord and ordering repayment of 70% of the relevant rent.

After Mr Campbell alleged that he had been denied sufficient time to present his case, the FTT reviewed its decision under section 9 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. It held a further hearing for submissions, reduced repayment to 60%, and otherwise substantially repeated its earlier reasoning. The appeal concerned whether the landlord finding could be revisited and whether the review lawfully cured the unfairness and justified the quantum.

1. Landlord finding. The appeal succeeded only in part. The FTT was entitled to leave standing its finding that Mr Campbell was the landlord. That issue had been addressed at the start of the original hearing, before any alleged time pressure, and was supported by the parties’ agreement, his written and oral evidence, the tenancy agreements and rent-payment records.
2. Scope of review. Under section 9 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and rule 55 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, review is available only where an appeal is likely to succeed and must relate to one or more specific matters. The FTT must identify what is under review and what, if anything, is set aside. A hearing will rarely be required. If a hearing is needed to discover whether an error occurred, the proper course is generally to grant permission to appeal rather than conduct a review.
3. Natural justice. The FTT accepted that the original hearing had been unfair because Mr Campbell had insufficient time to present his case and had not cross-examined all the tenants. A later hearing for submissions, held without the tenants and after the FTT had already decided the case, could not remedy that defect. The review was outside the statutory scope and the FTT should have set aside the 2023 decision and held a fresh hearing under section 9(5).
4. Quantum. Section 44(4) of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 requires the FTT to take account of the conduct of landlord and tenant, the landlord’s financial circumstances and relevant convictions. The FTT nevertheless repeated concerns instead of making findings in response to evidence, relied on matters raised on its own initiative, and gave no intelligible explanation for reducing repayment from 70% to 60%. Where an HMO licence has been granted without conditions, concerns about housing standards should not affect quantum unless established facts show hazards or regulatory failures indicating that the property could not be licensed.
5. Order. The finding that Mr Campbell was the landlord stood. The decision on quantum was set aside in its entirety and remitted to the FTT for a rehearing before a different panel. The tenants were required to seek directions within 28 days if they wished to pursue the application.

• First-tier Tribunal, Property Chamber: made rent repayment orders on 11 April 2023, then reviewed that decision on 22 July 2024, reducing repayment from 70% to 60%.
• Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber): set aside the FTT’s decision on quantum and remitted that issue for rehearing before a different panel; the landlord finding stood.