A tenant applied to buy his council flat under the Right to Buy. The council acknowledged his right & told him the price he would have to pay
The tenant issued a statutory notice of delay. Completion was delayed, the price remained fixed, & he continued to pay rent as a tenant
When he was in a position to complete, he claimed that the rent he had paid during the period of delay should be treated as a contribution towards the purchase price
The rent paid was £17,000. The purchase price was £17,000. No further payment was required
The Court of Appeal agreed
The twist in this tale is that the tenant was in receipt of Housing Benefit
The rent had been paid by book transfer from the housing benefit account to the tenant rent account. In effect, the council had paid the rent
The relevant law seems complicated, involving the Housing Acts of 1985 & 1988 & the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act of 1989. But the Court ruled that rent is rent, whoever pays it
I recollect that Lord Goodman dubbed the 1984 Housing Act the worst example of legislation by cross reference that he had seen. Attempts to clear the ground do not seem to have been all that successful
On balance I feel forced to conclude that whoever guided the tenant through the thicket of cross reference deserves a medal
Link:
House of Lords Hansard for 1984 is not on the web
