Tweet
All tenants on local authority owned allotments should be thanking Johnmac for highlighting this issue.
A court case about a dispute about allotment rents is about as rare as hen's teeth and anyone facing rent increases should be aware of the 1981 Chancery Division of the High Court case Dennis John Harwood v The Borough of Reigate and Banstead.
The resolution was not rooted in the allotments acts but on the issue of unfairness and discrimination against allotment holders and so applies in Scotland where there is quite separate allotments legislation as well as South of the border.
In the judgement, Mr Vivian Price QC made the following observation "What does seem to me to be the right approach for (unknown word) council to take is not to discriminate against this recreational activity as compared with other recreational activities" he goes on to say " in the ordinary case, if there is to be an increase in the (unknown word)charged, then it should be in line with the other increases that (unknown word) have been charged for the use of the other recreational facilities. He concludes by saying that the stance taken By Reigate and Banstead Council "has resulted, in this particular case in an unfair and excessive charge being imposed upon the allotment holders"Where I have inserted "unknown word" it is because I have been unable to read the word from the rather poor copy of the judgement
Bring this case to the notice of your Council if it proposes to increase your rents by more than it is increasing its charges for othe council owned leisure facilities. A copy of the judgement can be seen here http://www.baf.me.uk/harwood.pdf
Jhnmac also raised the matter ofThe Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 which makes it automatically unfair for a landlord to impose an arbitrary increase in rent. Guidance by the OFT on unfair terms in tenancy agreements indicates that unless increases are linked to such external factors as the RPI or evaluated by an objective person independent of the landlord they may be deemed to be unfair.
A court case about a dispute about allotment rents is about as rare as hen's teeth and anyone facing rent increases should be aware of the 1981 Chancery Division of the High Court case Dennis John Harwood v The Borough of Reigate and Banstead.
The resolution was not rooted in the allotments acts but on the issue of unfairness and discrimination against allotment holders and so applies in Scotland where there is quite separate allotments legislation as well as South of the border.
In the judgement, Mr Vivian Price QC made the following observation "What does seem to me to be the right approach for (unknown word) council to take is not to discriminate against this recreational activity as compared with other recreational activities" he goes on to say " in the ordinary case, if there is to be an increase in the (unknown word)charged, then it should be in line with the other increases that (unknown word) have been charged for the use of the other recreational facilities. He concludes by saying that the stance taken By Reigate and Banstead Council "has resulted, in this particular case in an unfair and excessive charge being imposed upon the allotment holders"Where I have inserted "unknown word" it is because I have been unable to read the word from the rather poor copy of the judgement
Bring this case to the notice of your Council if it proposes to increase your rents by more than it is increasing its charges for othe council owned leisure facilities. A copy of the judgement can be seen here http://www.baf.me.uk/harwood.pdf
Jhnmac also raised the matter ofThe Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 which makes it automatically unfair for a landlord to impose an arbitrary increase in rent. Guidance by the OFT on unfair terms in tenancy agreements indicates that unless increases are linked to such external factors as the RPI or evaluated by an objective person independent of the landlord they may be deemed to be unfair.
