Eviction by rent increase

All commenters to date seem to concur that increasing rent is not a viable solution to the problem posted by Rick.

However, there seems to be many differences opinion here, from people I respect, about the rules concerning section 13 notices. Having always increased rent by agreement I have never had cause to study section 13 of the housing act 1988 in any detail. Having now read these conflicting opinions I have read the legislation and I'm still none the wiser. No wonder there are so many interpretations of the rules given in this thread.

The following is the legislation ...... GOOD LUCK!!!

13 Increases of rent under assured periodic tenancies.

(1)This section applies to—

(a)a statutory periodic tenancy other than one which, by virtue of paragraph 11 or paragraph 12 in Part I of Schedule 1 to this Act, cannot for the time being be an assured tenancy; and

(b)any other periodic tenancy which is an assured tenancy, other than one in relation to which there is a provision, for the time being binding on the tenant, under which the rent for a particular period of the tenancy will or may be greater than the rent for an earlier period.

(2)For the purpose of securing an increase in the rent under a tenancy to which this section applies, the landlord may serve on the tenant a notice in the prescribed form proposing a new rent to take effect at the beginning of a new period of the tenancy specified in the notice, being a period beginning not earlier than—

(a)the minimum period after the date of the service of the notice; and

(b)except in the case of a statutory periodic [F1 tenancy—

(i)in the case of an assured agricultural occupancy, the first anniversary of the date on which the first period of the tenancy began;

(ii)in any other case, on the date that falls 52 weeks after the date on which the first period of the tenancy began; and]

F1(c)if the rent under the tenancy has previously been increased by virtue of a notice under this subsection or a determination under section 14 [F2 below—

(i)in the case of an assured agricultural occupancy, the first anniversary of the date on which the increased rent took effect;

(ii)in any other case, the appropriate date]

F2(3)The minimum period referred to in subsection (2) above is—

(a)in the case of a yearly tenancy, six months;

(b)in the case of a tenancy where the period is less than a month, one month; and

(c)in any other case, a period equal to the period of the tenancy.

[F3(3A)The appropriate date referred to in subsection (2)(c)(ii) above is—

(a)in a case to which subsection (3B) below applies, the date that falls 53 weeks after the date on which the increased rent took effect;

(b)in any other case, the date that falls 52 weeks after the date on which the increased rent took effect.

(3B)This subsection applies where—

(a)the rent under the tenancy has been increased by virtue of a notice under this section or a determination under section 14 below on at least one occasion after the coming into force of the Regulatory Reform (Assured Periodic Tenancies)(Rent Increases) Order 2003; and

(b)the fifty-third week after the date on which the last such increase took effect begins more than six days before the anniversary of the date on which the first such increase took effect.]

F3(4)Where a notice is served under subsection (2) above, a new rent specified in the notice shall take effect as mentioned in the notice unless, before the beginning of the new period specified in the notice,—

(a)the tenant by an application in the prescribed form refers the notice to a rent assessment committee; or

(b)the landlord and the tenant agree on a variation of the rent which is different from that proposed in the notice or agree that the rent should not be varied.

(5)Nothing in this section (or in section 14 below) affects the right of the landlord and the tenant under an assured tenancy to vary by agreement any term of the tenancy (including a term relating to rent).

Annotations: Help about Annotation
Amendments (Textual)
F1
Words in s. 13(2)(b) substituted (11.2.2003) by The Regulatory Reform (Assured Periodic Tenancies) (Rent Increases) Order 2003 (S.I. 2003/259), art. 2(a)(i)
F2
Words in s. 13(2)(c) substituted (11.2.2003) by The Regulatory Reform (Assured Periodic Tenancies) (Rent Increases) Order 2003 (S.I. 2003/259), art. 2(a)(ii)
F3
S. 13(3A)(3B) inserted (11.2.2003) by The Regulatory Reform (Assured Periodic Tenancies) (Rent Increases) Order 2003 (S.I. 2003/259), art. 2(b)

An increase on a statutory periodic tenancy does not seem to be affected by a 12 month 'qualifying' period - an SPT that arose after a 1 month fixed term could be subject to section 13 according to 13(2)(b).

Reply to the comment left by "Dave Reaney" at "18/09/2013 - 23:08":

Yeah, that's my understanding.

If a landlord doesn't enforce a section 21 notice as soon as it expires, when he wishes to do so how much notice must he give to the tenant?

Reply to the comment left by "irene havard" at "19/09/2013 - 21:12":

Theoretically none, the landlord could simply apply to the Courts for possession. However, the tenant would be informed and Court dates can take several weeks so in effect the tenant would have notice. Most landlords are reasonable people and would communicate with tenants prior to applying for a possession order I would like to think.

Reply to the comment left by "Dave Reaney" at "18/09/2013 - 23:08":

My understanding is that F13 (2)(c) would mean that the S. 13 notice could be served now and rent could be increased after one month. A periodic tenancy lasts from one month to next - period of tenancy relevant to this section on minimum notice= 1 month. I would only go this route if I was not bothered about how long this would go on for, and would re-issue the S.21, for clarity sake, when I then wanted the property back within 6 months (assuming court action would take that long, which it would do in my area). I don't see that serving the S.13 notice would affect the S.21 notice. In fact I am pretty certain the S.21 notice I use states on it that other notices may be served but that it will not affect the S.21 notice..

However, I have a fear this may complicate an otherwise straightforward S.21 court action, so would not try it myself.