Reply To: History Anyone?

Peter Barker

Is it not the same case?

At UT level, the Judge said that Birmingham could only say the rent was unreasonably high after levelling the playing field and adjusting the comparator rent to account for the support contract.

Birmingham appealed to the Court of Appeal, and the court said that the funding disparity was not relevant to the question of whether the rent was unreasonably high: the issue is whether the rent is reasonable for the claimant to pay, not whether it is reasonable for the landlord to charge. However, when it comes to the amount of the restriction to be imposed, that is discretionary and at that stage the Council should have due regard to the reasons why landlord A needs to charge more than Landlord B. The case was remitted to the UT for that discretion to be exercises, with an expectation conveyed that the restriction might only be a token amount like £1 or so.

The record will show that Birmingham won their appeal, but don’t say to a Birmingham HB officer “Hey, I saw that appeal you won – nice result!” Imagine a Brummie saying “Ha! Won, did we? I’m glad you think we won. It’s a good job we didn’t lose. ‘Won’ indeed. Pah!”