S v Birmingham City Council
Factual Background
S’s claim related to disrepair present in her end terrace house consisting of an entrance hall, stairs, open plan living room/dining room and kitchen, WC, bathroom and three bedrooms (“the Property”). S resided at the Property under the terms of a tenancy agreement (“the Tenancy”) provided by Birmingham City Council (“BCC”) under which the weekly rent for the Property paid by S was £119.41 (“the Rent”).
S had lived at the Property since 9 September 2017 on an occupation change and was offered an introductory tenancy on 15 October 2018, converting to the Tenancy in 2019.
Since 2017, S had been reporting issues and defects (“the Defects”) in the Property to BCC by email. The Defects included:
- Hole present in the roof;
- Insultation cladding fitted to the exterior of the Property coming away from the walls;
- Window sill not secured to cladding
- Blocked drains
- Gaps present around the front door
- Split locking latch and loose lock on front door
- Gaps present between the window and the window frame
- Inadequate heating
- Plug socket detached from wall in living room
- Plug sockets detached from wall in Bedroom One, Two and Three
- Crumbling plasterwork
- Window lacking a handle in the kitchen
- Windows lacking a handle and locks in Bedroom One, Two and Three
- Electric wiring and main switch board in need of replacement
- Kitchen sink unit not attached to the wall
- Loose worktop
- No extractor fan in the kitchen
- No extractor fan in the bathroom
- Defective window in the bathroom
- Defective drain
- Blocked toilet
As well as receiving notice of the Defects from S via email, BCC (or the agents acting on its behalf) visited and inspected the Property so were able to see the Defects complained of. Both S and BCC instructed their own surveyors to attend and inspect the Property – BCC’s surveyor recommended repair work totalling £1,360.00 whereas S’s surveyor valued the repair work at £6,135.75.
The Court initialled proposed allocation to the Fast Track, given the circumstances of the Claim. However, BCC alleged that it had undertaken the repairs and there were no Defects at the Property that still required action. BCC argued that given this, the Small Claims Track was more appropriate, as there would be no remedy for specific performance. S disputed that all the Defects had been repaired, but the Court allocated the matter to the Small Claims Track.
Ahead of the trial, S re-instructed her surveyor to attend and inspect the Property to provide an updated report on what Defects still required action by BCC. The updated report valued the outstanding Defects at £3,138.75.
As of the date of the trial, the following Defects were still present in the Property:
- Hole in the roof
- A leak from the toilet causing contamination to the service room
- An electrical test to be carried out in the kitchen
- Re-positioning of the extractor fan in the kitchen for technical reasons
- Loose worktop in the kitchen
- Failed double glazing units in the bedroom
- Dislodged pipe in the main drainage system causing blockages and leaks
S therefore sought an order for specific performance and general damages as she alleged BCC had failed to carry out the repairs to her Property as obliged under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (“Section 11”) and the Tenancy.
Submissions for BCC
BCC did not file an updated surveyor’s report and relied on its Witness Statement produced ahead of the Allocation Hearing. In this statement, BCC listed what Defects it considered required action and the cost of those repairs. It valued the total works at £500.00.
BCC accepted that there were Defects that it may be required to address as part of its Section 11 obligations, which included the hole in the roof and issues with the front entrance door. However, it argued that there were Defects raised by S in her evidence that were not included in the pleadings, with further Defects that BCC said it had never received notice of.
Once it has been established that BCC was liable for the Defects, BCC suggested an award equal to a 15% reduction in S’s rent for a period spanning approximately two years and three months, totalling £2,300.00.
Submissions for S
It was S’s case that a more appropriate rent reduction to reflect the distress, inconvenience, and diminution in value of the Tenancy was something in the order of 25-30% for the period six years preceding the date of issue of the claim.
Judgment
Without hesitation, the Judge accepted S’s evidence of the events of this claim spanning the last 6 or so years.
The Judge was satisfied that BCC had an obligation under Section 11 and the Tenancy to repair the roof, drains, kitchen worktop and apply tiles to the wall of the kitchen.
The Judge said there was no dispute that S should be awarded general damages for loss of enjoyment of her Property. It was decided that BCC needed to be given a reasonable period of time in which to carry out the repairs, which in the Judge’s judgment amounted to six months.
Accordingly, the Judge awarded S a sum equal to a 25% rental reduction for 5.5 years in recognition of the severity of this Defects at the Property. This amounted to £8,500.00 in general damages. The Judge also made an order for specific performance in relation to works required to the roof, the worktop, tiling in the kitchen and a dislodged pipe at the Property, to be completed within two months.
