Jenny Yi v Nick Hobbs & Anor
Decision date: 3 June 2024
Neutral citation: [2024] UKUT 155 (LC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: high
This appeal concerned two rent repayment orders (RROs) made by the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) against Ms Yi for managing an unlicensed five‑bed HMO. The Upper Tribunal found the FTT had inexplicably given only 50% credit for rent arrears in Mr Hobbs’ case and had made arithmetic errors in Mr Alaike’s award, set aside those parts of the FTT decision and substituted corrected awards (£1,608.92 for Mr Hobbs; £3,420.06 for Mr Alaike), with immediate payment and fee directions preserved. Ms Yi may apply within 14 days for repayment of appeal fees from the respondents under the relevant rule.
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: medium
The FTT has a discretion to take tenant conduct, including arrears occurring outside the statutory RRO period, into account when assessing the amount payable; where the amount of arrears is undisputed and no satisfactory explanation for a partial deduction is given, it may be appropriate to set the whole of those arrears against the amount repayable.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
The tribunal noted that arguments about inflation reducing nominal awards are irrelevant to the correctness of RRO calculations, and commented that it is undesirable for a public authority officer to resist correcting obvious arithmetical errors.