A property tribunal has ordered six tenants to pay £3,240 in costs after finding that a settlement demand backed by Justice for Tenants was made to intimidate the landlord.

The tenants had claimed a £60,000 Rent Repayment Order which the judge described as the “most egregious example” of unreasonable behaviour.

The tribunal heard that the tenants rented the HMO in Alderney Road, London, for two years until September 2024. They sought the order against the landlord VHGK Ltd in respect of the 12 months ending in July 2024 but withdrew the application in October 2025.  

Justice for Tenants had advised the tenants they had a potential claim for a RRO in December 2024 for two months’ rent, saying that the property was unlicensed between May and July 2024. However, there had been licences in place for the whole period.  

In May 2025, Justice for Tenants made the landlord an offer without prejudice save as to costs to settle the matter at 85% of the 12 months’ rent. There had been no pre-claim correspondence and no attempt prior to making the application to narrow the issues, the tribunal heard.

Conduct

The judge said there were four concrete examples of unreasonable conduct by Justice for Tenants, including that its request to the local authority for information about the licensing position was defective.

By December 2024 it had clearly established that there was a prior licence, but in May 2025 it issued the substantive application claiming repayment of 12 months of rent. “This is the most egregious example of unreasonable behaviour in this case,” said the judge.  

James Cairns, who appeared for Justice for Tenants, suggested that this was just a mistake. The judge said there was no explanation for how such a mistake could come to have been made. However, he added Cairns only became involved in the case once the landlord’s application for costs was made.  

Claim

The claim for 85% was grossly exaggerated, the judge added. “We do not accept that Justice for Tenants can have had any genuine belief that 85% was a reasonable settlement figure. On the contrary, we find it was made to intimidate the landlord, who had no legal advice at that point.”

It ruled that the landlord acted reasonably by instructing a firm of estate agents, Acquire Estate Agents, costing £240, as well as seeking legal representation, at a cost of £3,000.

Cairns argued that the amount of costs sought was disproportionate. However, the judge said: “We find as a fact that the landlord could not have obtained proper representation for less.”

Photo: Google Streetview

‍