Tribunal calls rent-2-rent agent ‘reprehensible’

We have long counselled against 'rent-2-rent' relationships unless the legal relationship is clearly defined and the sub-landlord is known and reputable. A First Tier Tribunal recently awarded 70% of rent to be repaid to a nurse, illegally evicted by the sub-landlord from a property near Croydon.  

The Details

The nurse took a room in a property along with 4 others – the rent-2-rent agent did not live there and stated he was 'just managing the property for the landlord'.

The nurse told the Tribunal that in December 2022 the rent-2-rent agent told him to leave in two weeks' time. The nurse refused, saying he needed more time to find somewhere. He paid the rent on 25th January 2023, but the same day the rent-2-rent agent changed the locks and locked him out of the property. The rent-2-rent agent never repaid the deposit, nor the rent paid on 25th January 2023. The nurse had difficulty recovering his property from his room.

From the tribunal report, the rent-2-rent agent originally rented the property with his brother and his mother and he claimed that after they left, he remained and took in lodgers nut never more than 4 so it was never an HMO. The testimony of the nurse and other witnesses confirmed that the rent-2-rent agent did not live there and the house was let to them as an HMO.

The rent-2-rent agent could provide no evidence that he had paid the electricity or gas bills, nor the WiFi. He did provide a council tax bill dated 10th February 2023, which showed arrears of £3,991 of which £3,229.76 was already the subject of court proceedings.

The judge in the case stated, "We are sure that the applicant has established his case. Throughout the period for which the rent repayment order is sought, the property was occupied by at least five men (and generally six) who all formed separate households. They occupied as their sole residence. The respondent did not live there at any time relevant to the applicant's claim."

The judge went on to say, "In a bad case such as the present, caselaw shows that an award of up to 85 per cent of the rent paid by the applicant can be made. We do, however, have to consider the respondent's means. He has a County Court award against him in favour of Mr Naveenthiran (the actual landlord, for rent arrears) in the sum (including costs) of £9,067.95. He also owes council tax and other monies. In our judgment it is appropriate in these circumstances to make a rent repayment order in the sum of 70 per cent of the rent claimed. The rent repayment order will therefore be in the sum of £4,872 (70 per cent of £6,960)."

PDPLA Vice Chairman and local letting agent, Alwin Oliver said, "This is a warning to any landlord about the pitfalls of subletting (and indeed of below market rent in general). As ever, the head landlord would have been better doing the job themselves or using a competent agent. But the good news in this case is that whereas in the past, the landlord who owned the property would have been at fault, the law appears to have caught up with the rent-2-rent model and now correctly treats the rent-2-rent agent as a landlord in the eyes of the law, at least for the moment. We will of course need to look out for any changes being proposed in the forthcoming Renters Rights Bill".