Two tenants in a Birmingham flat claimed back £7,517.47 in rent paid while the flat was unlicensed. They won, but not as much as they had hoped. Part-way through, the landlord had obtained a temporary exemption notice, and the tribunal treated the unlicensed periods before and after it as two separate offences. Only the later one fell within the 12-month time limit, so the tribunal ordered £2,115.33, half of the £4,230.65 paid in that period, plus the £114.00 application fee.
What happened
Two tenants rented a flat in Birmingham from a private landlord who let the flat through a managing agent. The tenancy began in February 2020. Birmingham City Council’s selective licensing scheme came into force on 5 June 2023, and the flat then needed a licence.
The landlord applied for a TEN on 5 September 2023. The council granted it from 6 October 2023 to 5 January 2024. No licence application was made until 22 April 2024, and a licence was granted on 8 July 2024. The tenants applied to the tribunal on 17 April 2025.
The tenants argued that the unlicensed periods before and after the TEN were one continuing offence. The landlord said the earlier period was out of time, that she had relied on her agent, and that the tenants had damaged the flat.
How the tribunal decided
The offence. It was not disputed that the flat was unlicensed. The landlord did not formally raise a reasonable excuse defence, but the tribunal considered one anyway. It found no evidence that the agent was contractually bound to keep her informed of licensing requirements (§51). Because she had applied for the TEN herself, she knew when it ran out (§52). The defence failed (§53).
Two offences, not one. The tribunal held that while the TEN was in force the flat did not need a licence, so the first offence ended. A new offence began when the TEN expired and ran until 21 April 2024. It found that “the offence committed prior to and after the expiry of the TEN are two separate offences” (§66). The first period fell outside the 12 months before the application, so the tribunal had no jurisdiction over it (§66).
The maximum. The tribunal calculated the rent paid from 6 January 2024 to 21 April 2024 as £4,230.65 (§67). A payment made on 22 April 2024, the day of the licence application, was excluded.
Seriousness and conduct. A selective licensing offence was not the most serious type (§69). But the flat had always been an investment property. Once the TEN had been granted, the tribunal found “she was well aware of the requirement for a licence after that date”, and her delay of about three and a half months in applying, “if not deliberate, was at least negligent” (§70).
The tribunal found the flat had been in good condition at the start and that the complaints about damp and repairs were not serious (§71). It also found the flat was in poor condition at the end of the tenancy, and that an email from the tenants to the agent, setting out demands linked to not bringing an RRO, was far from appropriate (§72). Weighing everything, it found “a deduction of 50% of the maximum rent was appropriate” (§73). It also ordered the landlord to repay the £114.00 application fee (§76).
What it means for tenants
A TEN can reset the clock. On this tribunal’s reasoning, a TEN ends one offence and a fresh offence starts when it expires. Rent paid before the TEN may then fall outside the 12-month limit. If your landlord has had a TEN, look carefully at the dates and act promptly.
Your own conduct counts. The tribunal weighs the conduct of both sides. The condition you leave the property in, and the tone of what you write to the landlord or agent about an RRO, can reduce the award. Keep correspondence factual and measured.
For more on time limits, evidence and how tribunals decide the amount, see the Flat Justice RRO guide.
If your landlord had a temporary exemption notice, work out the dates carefully: it may split the claim in two.
Read the decision
Read the full decision on GOV.UK
Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
