Introduction
1.The five appellants were joint tenants of a house which was required to be licensed as an HMO. It was not licensed and the offence of being in control of or managing an unlicensed HMO contrary to section 72(1) Housing Act 2004 (the 2004 Act), was therefore committed by their landlord, Mr Nayyer Jahanghir, unless it could be proven that he had a reasonable excuse for being in control of the HMO in those circumstances. 2.Where a relevant housing offence has been committed, including the offence under section 72(1), the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) (the FTT) has power under section 41 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 (the 2016 Act) to make a rent repayment order requiring the landlord to repay an amount of rent paid by a tenant. The appellants applied to the FTT for such an order, but the FTT dismissed their application. It did so because it considered the appellants had failed to provide admissible evidence in support of their claim and so were unable to prove the facts necessary to establish beyond reasonable doubt that an offence had been committed. The FTT also made orders for the payment of costs by the appellants and by the organisation which had represented them in the proceedings, Justice for Tenants.3.The appellants now appeal both the FTT’s substantive decision and its costs decision. At the hearing of the appeal they were represented by Ms Clara Sherratt, of Justice for Tenants. Mr Jahanghir had sadly died before the matter was heard by the FTT, and the application and the appeal proceeded against his estate, acting by his daughter and personal representative, Ms Saira Jahanghir. The estate was represented at the appeal by Mr Daniel Wand.