First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent for Assured Shorthold Tenancy
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal adjusted the rent for a tenant's property in Southall. They considered the property's condition, amenities, and similar properties in the area. The new rent was set at £1000 per calendar month, starting from 5 September 2024.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a fair rent based on the property's condition and comparable properties in the area.
📖 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 a fair rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal adjusted the rent after considering the condition and amenities of the property.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal adjusted the rent for a property located in Southall, taking into account the property's condition, amenities, and comparable properties in the area. The new rent was set at £1000 per calendar month, effective from 5 September 2024.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2013
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00AJ/MNR/2024/0635 Property : Annexe R/O 19 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant: [redacted] : None Respondent : [redacted] Representative : [RESPONDENT] (Agent) Type of Application : Section 13(4) Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Members :
[NAME] and venue of Hearing : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of Decision : 17 December 2024
REASONS FOR DECISION
Background
1 The First Tier Tribunal received an application of 2 September 2024 from the [APPELLANT] of the Property, regarding a notice of increase of rent served by the landlord, under S.13 of the Housing Act 1988 (the Act).
2 This corrected, second notice, dated 5 August 2024, proposed a new rent of £1050 per calendar month, with effect from and including 5 September 2024. The passing rent was said to be £850 pcm in the
2 landlord’s Notice. The tenancy is an assured shorthold periodic monthly tenancy. A copy of the last tenancy agreement was provided.
3 Directions were issued 22 October 2024. Neither party requested a hearing. The Tribunal does not routinely carry out inspections.
4 The Tribunal received an initial application. The Tribunal sent out its standard Reply Form to both landlord and [APPELLANT]. Neither returned it.
5 The Tribunal carefully considered and noted such representations as it received from both parties regarding the location layout size and condition of the Property and other available and let comparable properties in the location.
Property
6 The Property appears to be studio building set within the rear garden of the main house at No.[ADDRESS], Southall. The main house is a 2 storey 1960’s brick and tile, mid terrace house. There is a pedestrian access from the public road across the front driveway, shared with the neighbouring house at No.21 to rear of the terrace and the rear garden. The [APPELLANT] the shares that access and the rear garden with the landlord.
7 The Property contains a single living room. There is a small kitchen and small shower room/ wc off. There is no mention of the cost of mains services being included in the rent. The Tribunal concludes that separate charge is made directly by the [NAME] or via the landlord’s own supplies to the main house.
8 The furniture in the Property and let to the [APPELLANT] is: Bed frame, mattress, dining table, 2 chairs, wardrobe, washing machine and stove. The tenants describes the electric stove as broken. There is no mention of carpets and curtains being provided by the landlord.
9 The Tribunal had regard to Google Streetview of the front of [ADDRESS] (data capture September 2020). The Tribunal is grateful for such other information as was supplied by the parties when setting the rent.
Law
10 In accordance with the terms of S14 of the Housing Act 1988 we are required to determine the rent at which we consider the property might reasonably be expected to let in the open market, by a willing landlord, under an assured tenancy, on the same terms as the actual tenancy; ignoring any increase in value attributable to [APPELLANT]’s improvements and any decrease in value due to the [APPELLANT]’s failure to comply with any terms of the tenancy. Thus the Property falls to be valued as it stands; but assuming that the Property to be in a reasonable internal decorative condition.
3 Decision
11 Based on the Tribunal’s own general knowledge of market rent levels in and around Southall, it determines that the subject Property would let on a normal Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST) terms, for £1050 per calendar month, fully fitted and in good order. However it appears that carpets and curtains/ blinds are not included and the electric stove the sole means of cooking was defective and is now broken and unusable.
12 The Tribunal finds that there was an absence of floor and window coverings with the letting and with the broken cooker, it makes a deduction of £50 pcm to reflect these failings. The market rent is therefore determined at £1000 pcm.
13 The new rent will take effect from and including 5 September 2024 the effective start date given in the landlord’s corrected, second, Notice. As the Form of Determination dated 17 December 2024 states: The Landlord is not obliged but, may charge a rent up to but, not in excess of, the figure shown at box 1.
Name: [NAME]. [NAME]: 17 December 2024
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 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 decision to the person making the application (regulation 52 (2) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rule 2013).
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/0AJ/MNR/2024/0635
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 Annexe r/o 19 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
[NAME]
Landlord J. [APPELLANT]
[APPELLANT] [NAME]
1. The rent is: £ 1000 Per pcm
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 5 September 2024
*3. The amount included for services is negligible nil Per Calendar month
*4. Service charges are variable and are not included n/a
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 5 August 2020
6. Length of the term or rental period Calendar monthly periodic
7. Allocation of liability for repairs Per tenancy
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Bed frame, mattress, dining table, 2 chairs wardrobe, washing machine, electric cooker. Cooker broken.
9. Description of premises Garden Studio. With access from and shared use of rear garden to main house adjacent. 1 studio room, kitchen, bathroom/ wc. The Landlord is not obliged but may charge a rent up to but, not in excess of the figure shown at box 1.
[NAME] of Decision 17 December 2024
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rules Rent Increase Notices Invalid
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Tenancy at £1,675
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Shorthold Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Studio Flat in Gipsy Hill
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Safety Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Periodic 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
- The Tribunal used its knowledge of local market rents to set a fair rent for the property.
- The absence of floor and window coverings in the property led to a rent deduction.
- The broken and unusable electric stove resulted in a deduction from the market rent.
- The new rent takes effect from the date specified in the landlord's corrected notice.
- The Tribunal determined the market rent for the property to be £1000 per calendar month.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal adjusted the rent for the property to £1000 per calendar month.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the property's condition and comparable properties in the area.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988 sections 13 and 14 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The condition and amenities of the property were the most important factors.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure their property is in good condition and compare it to similar properties.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence included the property's condition, amenities, and comparable properties.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, either party can appeal the decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.
