First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Market Rent Due to Property Defects
📌 In brief
In this case, the First-tier Tribunal adjusted the proposed market rent of £950 per month for a one-bedroom flat in Leicester to £900 per month. The adjustment was made because of persistent moisture problems causing dampness inside the property.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to have adjustments made to the proposed market rent due to property defects and conditions affecting habitability.
📖 What the law says
This section allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the open-market rent based on reasonable expectations of what a willing landlord would charge for a similar tenancy.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined the market rent for a one-bedroom apartment in Leicester, adjusting for ongoing moisture ingress issues.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined the market rent for a one-bedroom apartment in Leicester, adjusting the proposed £950 pcm to £900 pcm due to ongoing moisture ingress issues and resulting damp conditions affecting habitability.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed in Part
© CROWN COPYRIGHT Case Reference : BIR/00FN/MNR/2026/0054 Property : Flat 14 [NAME], 17 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Tenant : [NAME] & [NAME] Landlord : [APPELLANT] Landlord’s agent : [RESPONDENT] of application : 24th January 2026 Type of Application : Determination of a Market Rent Sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Members : [NAME] W [NAME] K Bentley Date of Decision : 21st May 2026 _______________________________________________
DECISION The Tribunal determines a rent of £900 (Nine Hundred Pounds) per calendar month with effect from 28th February 2026 ____________________________________ FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
2
REASONS FOR THE
DECISION Background 1. On 16th December 2026 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £950 per calendar month in place of the existing rent of £815 pcm to take effect from 28th February 2026.
2. On 24th January 2026, under Section 13(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988, the Tenant referred the Landlord’s notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal for determination of a market rent. Inspection 3. The Tribunal did not inspect the property but considered this case on the basis of the papers provided by the parties and having regard to its own knowledge, expertise and online research. Evidence 4. The Tribunal considered the written submissions provided by the Tenant and the Landlord. From the brief information provided it appears that the subject property is a one-bedroom apartment with balcony located in a predominantly residential area approximately 1.2 miles from Leicester city centre.
5. The property is let on an Assured Shorthold Tenancy incorporating standard repairing obligations.
6. The Tenant submitted details including photographic evidence of the results of moisture ingress in the vicinity of the balcony resulting in damp and condensation within the property together with copy email communication between parties outlining failed attempts to rectify the ingress.
7. The Tenant further submitted email communication from the managing agent indicating that there was no longer any vehicular parking directly outside the property.
8. The Landlord referred to the moisture ingress in his submissions (agreeing that the lounge carpet could be replaced) but refuted other defects raised by the Tenant. The Landlord did not address the parking issue.
9. The Landlord’s agent, submitted to the Tribunal details of comparable properties and letting information of similar properties in the locality. The Tenant referred to screenshots of the local apartments advertised between £750 and £850 per calendar month.
3 Determination and Valuation 10. Having considered the comparable evidence provided by the Landlord and of our own expert knowledge of rental values in the area, we consider that the open market rent for the property in good tenantable condition would be £940 per calendar month.
11. However, the Tribunal considers that adjustments should be made to the market rent for the ongoing moisture ingress and resulting damp issues to the property by the amount of £40.00 per calendar month. Decision 12. The Tribunal therefore determined that the rent at which the subject property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing Landlord under an assured tenancy was £900 per calendar month with effect from 28th February 2026. Chairman: Date: 21st May 2026 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.
4 Notice of the Tribunal Decision and Register of Rents under Assured Periodic Tenancies (Section 14 Determination) Housing Act 1988 Section 14 Address of Premises The Tribunal members were Flat 14 [NAME], 17 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] T W Jones K Bentley Landlord [RESPONDENT] 10 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Tenant [NAME] & [NAME]
1. The rent is: £900 Per calendar month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 28 February 2026 3. The amount included for services is not applicable Per 4. Date assured tenancy commenced 30 November 2020 5. Length of the term or rental period 6 months 6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None 8. Description of premises One bedroom apartment with balcony. Chairman Date of Decision 21st May 2026 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. BIR/00FN/MNR/2026/0054
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £980 Per Month
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent at £1200 PCM
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Coventry Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Coventry Apartment
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy Flat
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Coventry Apartment
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Market Rent for Birmingham Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Fair Market Rent for HMO Bedroom
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Market Rent Due to Property Issues
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
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
- Rent should be set based on fair market value as determined by comparable properties.
- Evidence of property condition and state of repair must support the proposed rent increase.
- Rent setting should consider the current state of repair and condition of the property.
- The new rent must be reasonable and justified by reliable comparables and evidence of property condition.
- Rent should be set at a fair market rate considering the property's condition and location.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal adjusted the proposed market rent from £950 pcm to £900 pcm due to ongoing moisture ingress issues.
Who was involved?
A tenant and a landlord were in dispute over the market rent for a flat.
How did the court decide, and why?
The Tribunal considered evidence of property defects and adjusted the proposed rent accordingly.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988 were applied in this case.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The tenant's evidence about moisture ingress affecting habitability was crucial to the decision.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was partially in favour of the tenant, as it reduced the proposed rent.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Tenants facing property defects can argue for adjustments to market rents when disputes arise.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Photographic evidence and email communications about moisture ingress were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Either party may apply for permission to appeal on points of law within 28 days.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.
