[2024] UKUT 155 (LC)

The appeal against the order n favour of Mr Alaike rests purely on arithmetical errors, and the appellant’s case is now agreed by the FTT to be correct.

The FTT’s calculation of the amount payable in its decision was as follows:

In her grounds of appeal Ms Yi pointed out that the starting figure of £8,637 was wrong because Mr Alaike claimed 10 and a half months’ rent at £750 per month and that the total is obviously wrong by £1,000.

In its refusal of permission to appeal the FTT did not address these points. In its response to the Tribunal’s enquiry (see paragraph 14 above) the FTT agreed with Ms Yi’s points and substituted the following calculation:

In responding to the application for permission on behalf of both respondents to appeal Mr Williams argued, as set out above in connection with Mr Hobbs, that the sums in issue as against the two respondents together were too small to merit the use of the Tribunal’s resources; and again that inflation and delay would secure the reduction the appellant sought. The appeal against the order on favour of Mr Alaike rests simply on arithmetical errors and it is troubling that an officer of a public authority argued against their being corrected. The saving of the Tribunal’s resources that Mr Williams sought could have been achieved by the conceding of the appeal.

The appeal is allowed in respect of the order in favour of Mr Alaike and the figure provided by the FTT in its revised calculation is substituted for the original figure.