VadeLab
DismissedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Fair Rent for Nottingham Property

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal adjusted the fair rent for a Nottingham property after considering comparable evidence and the property's condition. The final fair rent was capped at £138.50 per week.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair rent adjusted for the property's condition and comparable evidence.

Topics

fair rentcomparable evidenceproperty condition

Provisions

Rent Act 1977Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal adjusted the fair rent after considering comparable evidence and the property's condition.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal adjusted the fair rent for a Nottingham property after inspecting the premises and considering comparable evidence from the landlord and tenant submissions. The final fair rent was capped at £138.50 per week due to statutory limits.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Dismissed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

Case Reference

: BIR/OOFY/F77/2024/0639

Property : 130A [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Tenant

: [APPELLANT]

Landlord : [APPELLANT]

Landlord’s [RESPONDENT] and Lettings

Date of Objection : 2nd December 2024

Type of Application : Section 70 Rent Act 1977

Tribunal Members : Mr [NAME] Mrs [NAME]

[NAME] : Mr [NAME] of Decision : 11th December 2025

Date of issue : 06 January 2026 _______________________________________________

DECISION

The sum of £138.50 per Week will be registered as the fair rent with effect from 11th December 2025 being the date the Tribunal made the Decision. ____________________________________

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

REASONS FOR THE DECISION Background

1. Following an objection from the Landlord to the determination of a fair rent by the Rent Officer, the Tribunal has made a determination under the provisions of the Rent Act 1977.

Inspection

2. The Tribunal inspected the property on 11th December 2025, following which a remote oral hearing was held.

The property comprises of a self-contained maisonette above a shop approached from an untidy alleyway at the rear of a block of shops. The alleyway also gives access to other flats in the row and to the rear of the various shops themselves.

From the alleyway, a door leads to a small yard with steel staircase leading to the first-floor kitchen which is fitted with a range of modern units incorporating an inset sink unit, oven and hob with extractor over.

The Kitchen leads to an inner hallway with stairs off to the second floor and giving access to the front lounge and bathroom being fitted with a small bath, low level WC and wash hand basin.

On the second floor are two bedrooms. The property has gas-fired central heating and UPVC double glazing throughout.

During the inspection the Tribunal was shown evidence of water penetration to the rear bedroom wall (although the area was dry at the time of the inspection). From our external inspection it appears that the gutter to the adjoining property which is at a higher level than the subject property may require cleaning out.

The Tribunal understands that the tenant contributed towards the cost of the kitchen and has fitted the floor and wall tiles to the kitchen, bathroom and areas of the first floor. He has also contributed to the cost of re-arranging the bathroom and towards the cost of the wash hand basin. The tenant has provided the washing machine, fridge and freezer.

Evidence

3. Submissions were made by the parties both in writing (Landlord) and at the hearing (both parties) which were considered by the Tribunal.

3 4. The Landlord submits (through his agent) that all maintenance repairs reported have been attended to, including cleaning out the rear gutters. The Landlord’s agent has also contacted the owner of the adjoining property regarding their blocked gutter but has not received a response.

5. The Landlord also submits details of open market lettings on several one and two- bedroom flats as comparable evidence. These range from £997.00-£1,050.00 per month. However, on consideration the Tribunal considered that many of these were not particularly helpful as many had only one bedroom and some were specifically marketed at students and some included outgoings.

6. The Tribunal considered two of the properties submitted by the Landlord to be helpful. a) A two-bedroom flat in [ADDRESS] marketed at £1,050.00pcm in March 2024. b) A two-bedroom flat in [ADDRESS] marketed at £1,040.00pcm in February 2024.

Both flats are in Nottingham and it was noted that both were furnished and although marketed at [NAME] did not include outgoings.

7. The Tenant confirmed that he did not have any comparable evidence to support his opinion as to rental value and submitted that he was in discussion with the Landlord regarding the installation of a stop tap and water meter. The Tribunal confirmed that this was a matter between himself, the Landlord and [NAME] and not within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

In addition, the Tenant confirmed the items of work/improvements referred to in paragraph 2 above.

Determination and Valuation

8. On consideration of the comparable evidence proved by the parties, that

forwarded by the Rent Officer, the inspection and its own expert knowledge of rental values in the area, the Tribunal considers that the open market rent for the property in a satisfactory condition but not above a shop in a secondary shopping area would be in the region of £220.00 per week. To reflect its location the Tribunal considers a deduction of 15% (£33.00) to be appropriate. This leaves an open market rental of £187.00 per week. From this level of rent, the Tribunal has made adjustments in relation to the following:

a) Improvements made by the Tenant £5.00 b) Curtains, carpets and white goods fitted by the Tenant £5.00 c) The Tenant’s liability to redecorate @5% say £10.00 Total £20.00

4

9. The Tribunal has also made an adjustment for scarcity using their own general

knowledge and experience. The Tribunal considers that in the wider geographical

area there is an imbalance of supply and demand impacting on rental values and

has therefore, made a reduction of 10% for scarcity.

10. The full valuation is shown below:

Market Rent

£187.00 per week

Less a) Items given under a) above

£5.00 b) Items given under b) above

£5.00 c) Tenant’s internal decoration liability @ 5% £10.00

Less Scarcity @ 10%

£16.70

£36.70

Say

£37.00

11. The Tribunal determines an uncapped rent of £150.00 per week.

Decision

12. The uncapped fair rent determined by the Tribunal, for the purposes of section 70, is therefore £150.00 per week from 11th December 2025. The maximum fair rent permitted by the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999 is £138.50 per week. This therefore limits the fair rent to be registered because it is above the maximum fair rent of £138.50 per week prescribed by the Order. The calculation of the capped rent is shown on the decision form.

Chairman: [NAME]: 11th December 2025

APPEAL PROVISIONS

If either party is dissatisfied with this decision, they may apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on any point of law arising from this Decision. Prior to making such an appeal, an application must be made, in writing, to this Tribunal for permission to appeal. Any such application must be made within 28 days of the issue of this statement of reasons (regulation 52 (2) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013) stating the grounds upon which it is intended to rely in the appeal.

5 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No.

BIR/OOFY/2024/0639

Notice of the Tribunal Decision

Rent Act 1977 Schedule 11

Address of Premises The Tribunal members were [ADDRESS] NG7 3 AJ

Mr [NAME] Mrs [RESPONDENT]

Mr [APPELLANT] ([NAME])

Landlord [APPELLANT]

Tenant [APPELLANT]

1. The fair rent is £138.50 Per Week (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3&4)

2. The effective date is 11th December 2025

3. The amount for services is ----------------------- Per ----------------------

Not applicable

4. The amount for fuel charges (excluding heating and lighting of common parts) not counting for rent allowance is

---------------------- Per ----------------------

Not applicable

5. The rent is not to be registered as variable.

6. The capping provisions of the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999 apply (please see calculation overleaf).

7. Details (other than rent) where different from Rent Register entry

8. For information only:

The fair rent to be registered is limited by the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999, because it is above the maximum fair rent of £138.50 per week permitted by the Order.

[NAME] of decision 11th December 2025

6 MAXIMUM FAIR RENT CALCULATION

LATEST RPI FIGURE X 407.4

PREVIOUS RPI FIGURE Y 312.0

X 407.4 Minus Y 312.0 = (A) 95.4

(A) 95.4 Divided by Y 312.0 = (B) 0.3057

First application for re-registration since 1 February 1999 YES/NO

If yes (B) plus 1.075 = (C)

If no (B) plus 1.05 = (C) 1.3557

Last registered rent* £102.00 Multiplied by (C) = £138.28 *(exclusive of any variable service charge)

Rounded up to nearest 50p = £138.50

Variable service charge NO If YES add amount for services N/A

MAXIMUM FAIR RENT = £138.50 Per Week Explanatory Note

1. The calculation of the maximum fair rent, in accordance with the formula contained in the Order, is set out above.

2. In summary, the formula provides for the maximum fair rent to be calculated by:

(a) increasing the previous registered rent by the percentage change in the retail price index (the RPI) since the date of that earlier registration and

(b) adding a further 7.5% (if the present application was the first since 1 February 1999) or 5% (if it is a second or subsequent application since that date).

A 7.5% increase is represented, in the calculation set out above, by the addition of 1.075 to (B) and an increase of 5% is represented by the addition of 1.05 to (B).

The result is rounded up to the nearest 50 pence.

3. For the purposes of the calculation the latest RPI figure (x) is that published in the calendar month immediately before the month in which the Tribunal’s fair rent determination was made.

4. The process differs where the tenancy agreement contains a variable service charge and the rent is to be registered as variable under section 71(4) of the Rent Act 1977. In such a case the variable service charge is removed before applying the formula. When the amount determined by the application of the formula is ascertained the service charge is then added to that sum in order to produce the maximum fair rent.

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • The tenant's fair rent was adjusted based on the property's condition.
  • The tenant's fair rent was determined using comparable rental evidence.
  • The landlord's objections lacked sufficient evidence.
  • The tenant's fair rent was recalculated considering improvements to the property.
  • The tenant's fair rent was set according to the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The landlord's objections were supported by evidence but the case was partially allowed.
  • The tenant's request for a new market rent determination was dismissed.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal adjusted the fair rent for a Nottingham property to £138.50 per week.

Who was involved?

The tenant and landlord were involved in the case.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the property's condition and comparable evidence from the landlord.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Rent Act 1977 and the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999 were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The comparable evidence provided by the landlord was crucial in determining the fair rent.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was against the person who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should provide strong comparable evidence to support their case.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The comparable evidence from the landlord and the property inspection report were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, either party can apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal on a point of law.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving fair rent determinations.

Official source: First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.