Housing disrepair claimants will have a new weapon available to hem in March 2019. It goes without saying that houses let for people to live in should be fit for human habitation, but for many years, there has been no meaningful law requiring this.
Provision was included within the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (LTA 1985) at Section 8, which implied a term into tenancy agreements that, on the grant of a new tenancy, the property would be fit for human habitation and that it would be kept as such throughout.
The problem with Section 8 is that it only applies to tenancies where the rent is £80 in London or £52 elsewhere and there has been no inflationary adjustment of these limits.
In March 2019, the Humans (Fitness for Habitation) Act 2018 (‘the Act’) comes into force and this has the effect of amending LTA 1985 to remove the limits and make the provisions applicable to most tenancies. The act can be found here: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2018/34/enacted
Once operational, the Act will require the courts to consider whether a property is in a condition of acceptable:
(i) Repair; (ii) Stability; (iii) Freedom from damp; (iv) Internal arrangement; (v) Natural lighting; (vi) Ventilation; (vii) Water supply; (viii) Drainage and sanitary conveniences; (ix) Facilities for the preparation and cooking of food; and (x) Facilities for the disposal of waste water.
A property is deemed to be unfit for human habitation, pursuant to the above requirements as found at Section 10 of the LTA 1985, if it is so far defective in one or more of these respects that it is not reasonably suitable for occupation in that condition. Tenants suffering from housing disrepair not covered by Section 11 may now have a claim that otherwise would have failed.
It is likely that the case law arising from the Act will continue in a similar fashion to that handed down under the LTA 1985. Some examples of properties that were deemed unfit for human habitation are:
(a) A small house where the only window could not be opened; (b) A house where plaster was falling from the ceiling; (c) A property where the ceiling had collapsed; and (d) A home where the waste disposal system failed causing serious damp.
There are limitations on what is covered. There is no liability for parts not let to the tenant such as communal areas and occasional incursions from vermin from outside would not fall under the provisions.
A guide to standards for Section 8, given by Atkin LJ in 1926, was:
“If the state of repair of a house is such that by ordinary use damage may naturally be caused to the occupier, either in respect of personal injury to life or limb or injury to health, then the house is not in all respects reasonably fit for human habitation.”
Despite this, the courts have taken an approach that the provisions should be limited to premises which can be made fit by the landlord at reasonable expense. This ruling in Buswell v Goodwin [1971] 1 WLR 92, CA has no basis in either Section 8 or the Act and is considered to be ripe for review by Luba, Foster and Prevatt in Repairs: tenants rights (5th edition).
Given the re-invigoration of the provisions of Section 8 by the Act, it shall be fascinating to see whether the Courts follow the decision in Buswell or take the opportunity to set a new bar for claims to ensure that landlords do not have the opportunity to rely on cost as an excuse for letting property considered unfit for human habitation.
by Jane Willacey
We were instructed by Mr B from The Midlands in the summer of 2021, he had beenexperiencing substantial disrepair issues within his council property since 2017. Our client had tried and failed on numerous occasions to get the council to sufficiently repair his home therefore he contacted us and we took on his case under a ‘No Win No Fee’ agreement to claim compensation and get his home repaired.
Rotten wooden window frames and blown seals were causing draughts, leaks, condensation, and black mould. Numerous calls and emails from our client to the council had resulted in the window frames being glossed over rather than being adequately repaired or replaced and whilst this caused our client great distress and inconvenience this was not the worst of the disrepair. A leak above the living room had been slowly making itself known and after numerous calls and emails to the council no less than three contractors attended the property for it to be reported on each occasion that they were “unable to find the cause of the leak” and “it’s just a slow drip” but of course a slow drip over time will eventually lead to a much bigger problem in the future and it eventually resulted in the living room ceiling collapsing.
The councils attempts to fix the clients property were few and far between and less than satisfactory which left our client with the stress and physical health implications of living in a constant state of disrepair.
Evidence of numerous phone calls, emails and letters to the council were supplied by the client along with a report from a reputable surveyor that confirmed that the level of disrepair within our client’s property was substantial.
We sent a detailed letter of claim to the council setting out that they were in breach of express and implied terms of tenancy and/or breach of their statutory and common law duties however they refused to accept liability or agree to do the repairs within a satisfactory time frame therefore we issued court proceedings.
The court ruled that the council was in breach of the terms of tenancy and the client was awarded compensation of £8,000 with all legal costs recovered from the other side. The living room ceiling was fixed and finished to a high standard with new windows fitted throughout within just a few weeks.
Our client had up until the point of instruction lived in a state of disrepair for a total of 1624 days and whilst the most important thing for the client’s health and well being was getting his home repaired the compensation for all the distress caused came a close second.
For more information on how compensation is generally calculated, read our article on this subject: https://www.mjvlaw.co.uk/legal-news/housing-disrepair-compensation/
by Jane Willacey
Refusing entry for repairs
There are many things that arise regularly in housing disrepair claims and landlords claiming tenants refuse entry to undertake repairs is one.
Landlords have the right to enter your property, provided they give reasonable notice to either carry out an inspection or repairs.
Breach of tenancy agreement
As landlords have the right to enter, such a refusal is a breach of a tenancy agreement. If this were to happen regularly, it could lead to eviction. Section 8 of the Housing Act 1988 allows evictions on certain, specific grounds. These are found at Schedule 2 of that Act and Ground 12 is that:
“The Tenant has breached any of the terms listed in the tenancy agreement”.
If you are a tenant of a housing association or council, it is likely that the type of tenancy you have would not enable your landlord to evict you using Section 21 of the Act and so eviction is only normally possible when the agreement is breached.
Housing disrepair claim
It is not common for us to encounter a client who has been, or has been threatened with being, evicted for failing to allow entry. Instead, the issue arises in the course of their housing disrepair claim.
A tenant must give notice of any items of disrepair.
For more information on notice requirements, read our guide to this https://www.mjvlaw.co.uk/legal-news/housing-disrepair-notice/
Once notice has been given, the tenant must allow their landlord access to undertake inspection and then undertake any repairs. While it sounds obvious that a tenant would allow entry for repairs they have reported, this is not always the case.
Often, tenants are unhappy with the work that their landlord has proposed. We often encounter landlords who misdiagnose a problem and try and solve it multiple times despite it failing to do so previously. This is common with damp. Landlords inspect and find damp. They treat the walls with damp treatment or paint and consider the problem solved. When it reappears, they return and apply the same treatment. In one case, the landlord did this five times.
It is not unreasonable for a tenant to be frustrated by such behaviour. Such landlords are clearly in breach of their repairing obligations under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. As of 20 March 2020, they are also likely to be in breach of them under the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 also.
However, to refuse access remains a breach of the tenant’s responsibilities and would provide the landlord with a defence to any claim.
What to do instead
If you have a housing disrepair issue and your landlord fails to address it correctly, contact MJV Solicitors for help.
Even when we are involved, we advise our clients to allow access and to ensure that they comply with the tenancy agreement.
If, as in the example above, your landlord has failed to properly investigate an issue and undertaken inadequate repairs, we can help. We will instruct a specialist surveyor to attend the property and prepare an expert report. It is extremely common for it to be revealed that there was a more serious, underlying problem that the landlord had chosen to ignore or missed entirely.
If a landlord continues to carry out inadequate repairs it is unlikely that these would disguise the true problem and so there is nothing to gain for a tenant by refusing entry.
False allegations
It is also common for us to act for clients who are accused of refusing entry, but deny this. The truth varies from case to case:
We have acted for clients who have been at home waiting for workmen and there has been no knock at the door. Later, they noticed that a card had been pushed through claiming that they had “missed them”. They called their landlord to explain, but nobody came a second time. This has happened far more than once;
We have acted for clients whose landlords claimed to have made appointments of which our clients had no idea so did not stay in; and
Many of our clients are vulnerable and so when workmen arrive without valid photographic ID they, quite rightly, refuse entry.
Landlords we have made claims about have all used these as excuses for trying to refuse claims. We support and help our clients and so tend to succeed with such claims.
Your claim
MJV Solicitors are based near Blackpool,but serve all of England and Wales for housing disrepair claims and have clients from the Isle of Wight, to South Wales to the North East. If you think you may have a claim, call us today on 01253 858231 or e-mail info@mjvlaw.co.uk for a free, no obligation discussion.
If we accept your claim it will be on a no win no fee basis and, in addition to the repairs we can require your landlord to undertake, we can obtain you compensation.
For more on compensation and how it is calculated, read our guide https://www.mjvlaw.co.uk/legal-news/housing-disrepair-compensation/
by Jane Willacey
Write your Will for free with us via the Alzheimer’s free Will service and discover how you can make a difference when you leave a gift to Alzheimer’s society.
For more information contact our team here at MJV Solicitors on 01253 858231 or email us at info@mjvlaw.co.uk
