First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided on a fair market rent for a tenant's property, reducing the landlord's proposed increase from £1,950 to £1,755 per month based on the property's condition and comparable evidence.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent assessment based on the property's condition and comparable evidence.
📖 What the law says
Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant with an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine a fair market rent based on the property's condition and comparable evidence. The determination considers the rent at which the property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent increase based on the property's condition and comparable evidence.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined that the fair market rent for a property in its current condition was £1,755 per month, adjusting the landlord's proposed increase of £1,950 based on comparable evidence and the property's condition.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
Case reference
:
LON/00BK/MNR/2025/0825
Property : [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant (Tenant) :
[NAME] [COUNSEL] [NAME] : None Respondent (Landlord) :
[NAME] [COUNSEL] : None Type of application : Section 13(4) Housing Act 1988 Tribunal members :
[NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] of Extended Reasons : 5 February 2026
DECISION
2
Decision of the tribunal
The Tribunal determines that the rent that the property in its current condition as at the 7 May 2025 might reasonably be expected to achieve in the open market under an assured periodic tenancy is £1,755 per month. Background 1. The tenant has lived in the property as assured periodic tenant since 2020 and the Tribunal were provided with a copy of the tenancy agreement which commenced on the 7 December 2020 for a term of 12 months at a rent of £1,290 per month. Therefore, this is a periodic assured tenancy.
2. The landlord served a notice pursuant to section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 on the 20 March 2025 seeking to increase the rent from £1,550 per month to £1,950 per month being an increase of £400 effective from 7 May 2025.
3. By an application dated 1 May 2025, the tenant referred that Notice to the Tribunal for a determination of the market rent.
4. On the 5 November 2025 the Tribunal made a determination and issued a Summary of Reasons and decision to the parties.
5. Following distribution of the Tribunal Decision and Summary Reasons the tenant sent to the Tribunal an application for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal. The Tribunal received the completed Application to Appeal form dated 19 October 2025 on 29 October 2025 by email.
6. In the reasons for the application, the tenant stated the Tribunal failed to investigate obvious factual issues before deciding on the papers. In the circumstances, the Tenant requests an inspection and hearing to determine the matter.
7. Having reviewed the application to appeal and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is satisfied that it is in the interests of justice to set aside the decision and that there was a misunderstanding whether an inspection and hearing should take place.
8. The Tribunal was satisfied that the requirements of Rule 51 were met and set aside the 14 October 2025 Decision, and a fresh of Directions were issued on the 5 November.
3 Evidence 9. The Tribunal has before it a bundle of evidence which includes a background to the case and the Directions. Each of the parties completed the Rent Appeal Statement and submissions which included a schedule of comparable evidence provided by the landlord. Inspection and Hearing 10. A hearing to hear the landlord’s representations was held at 10am on the 5 February 2026. The hearing was attended by the landlord [NAME] [APPELLANT]. The tenant [NAME] [APPELLANT] [NAME] did not attend.
The Landlord’s Case
11. The landlord contends that the range of comparable evidence provided in his statement provides verification that a rent increase to £1,950 is correct in the current market and is below the range of comparable evidence. The landlord states that the property was refurbished in 2019 and regular maintenance has taken place. The property has secondary glazing. The landlord confirmed he has a good relationship with the tenant and proposes to replace the panel bath with a walk-in shower. In addition, the microwave will be replaced.
12. Following the hearing, the Tribunal arrived at the property on the afternoon of the 5 February 2026 in the presence of the tenant.
13. The property is a converted ground floor flat which forms part of a four storey mid terrace Victorian building located in a road of similar properties close to local amenities and underground stations. The building has brick elevations under a pitched and tiled roof. There are single glazed windows with secondary glazing.. The Law 10. The rules governing a determination are set out in section 14 of the Housing Act 1988. In particular, the Tribunal is to determine the rent at which the property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy, subject to disregards in relation to the nature of the tenancy (i.e. it being granted to a “sitting tenant”) and any increase or reduction in the value due to the tenant’s improvements or failure to comply with the terms of the tenancy. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the Tribunal has proceeded on the basis that the landlord is responsible for repairs to the structure, exterior and any installations pursuant to section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the tenant for interior decoration.
4 The Valuation 11. Having carefully considered all the evidence the Tribunal considers that an achievable rent for the property in a good marketable condition with reasonably modern kitchen and bathroom fittings, modern services with carpets curtains and white goods provided by the Landlord would be £1,950 per month. This figure is based upon the Tribunal’s professional judgement and experience in the Marylebone area in the absence of any comparable evidence provided by the parties.
12. From this level of rent we have made adjustments in relation to the dated kitchen and bathroom fittings, small floor area, which equates to 10% (£195)
13. It should be noted that this figure cannot be a simple arithmetical calculation and is not based upon capital costs but is the Tribunal’s estimate of the amount by which the rent would need to be reduced to attract a tenant. Decision
14. 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 in its current condition was £1,755 per calendar month.
15. The Tenant made an application to the Tribunal under s14(7). This provision allows the Tribunal to defer the date of increase to the date of determination if it appeared to the Tribunal that it would cause undue hardship to the tenant. The Tenant’s representative has stated that the tenant is 3 months in arrears with rental payments due to confusion with housing benefit payments which will hopefully be resolved in the near future. The Tribunal has considered this request and on the balance of the evidence provided concludes that there is insufficient substantiation to show such undue hardship.
16. The Tribunal directs the new rent of £1,755 per month to take effect on the 7 May 2025. This, being the date set out in the Landlord’s Notice of Increase.
Chairman: [NAME]: 5 February 2026
5
Rights of appeal
By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, the tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may have. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), then a written application for permission must be made to the First- tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with the case. The application for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office within 28 days after the tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the person making the application. If the application is not made within the 28-day time limit, such application must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28-day time limit; the tribunal will then look at such reason(s) and decide whether to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the tribunal to which it relates (i.e. give the date, the property and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party making the application is seeking. If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00BK/MNR/2025/0825
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 Ground floor flat, 31 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
[NAME] [NAME] [RESPONDENT]
Landlord
[NAME] [RESPONDENT] [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Tenant [NAME] [APPELLANT]
1. The rent is: £ 1,755 Per Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 7 May 2025
*3. The amount included for services is not applicable
Per
*4. Service charges are not included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 1 December 2020
6. Length of the term or rental period Monthly Assured Periodic Tenancy
7. Allocation of liability for repairs In accordance with agreement
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Sofa-bed, dining table and chairs, white goods.
9. Description of premises A converted ground floor flat forming part of a Victorian building, accommodation comprises one bedroom, living room, kitchen, bathroom.
[NAME] of Decision 5 February 2026
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 11 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Due to Property Disrepair
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment for Assured Tenancy: First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal sets new rent for assured periodic tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Statutory Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment Case: Property Condition and Financial Hardship Considered
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Market Rent Determination: Tenant's Case Successful
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent for Tenant Based on Local Market Rates
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 property's condition is considered for a fair market rent.
- Comparable rental evidence is used to determine fair market rent.
- Rent adjustments consider the tenant's ability to pay.
- Improvements made by the tenant influence the rent adjustment.
- Local market conditions affect the fair market rent.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- Recent improvements to the property and market conditions led to a rent increase.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal decided on a fair market rent of £1,755 per month for the property.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved in the dispute over rent adjustment.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the property's condition and comparable evidence, adjusting the proposed rent increase.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988, specifically section 14, was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the condition of the property and the comparable evidence presented.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant, reducing the proposed rent increase.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should present strong evidence regarding the property's condition and comparable rents.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The condition of the property and comparable evidence mattered in the decision.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent adjustments.
