VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent for Assured Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal adjusted the rent for an assured periodic tenancy from £1,175 to £1,000 per month after considering the property's condition and market comparables.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair rent adjustment based on the property's condition and market comparables.

Topics

rent determinationproperty conditioncomparable evidence

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 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. The determination considers the property's condition and market comparables.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.

📖 Technical summary

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

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent from £1,175 to £1,000 per month for an assured periodic tenancy, taking into account the property's condition and market comparables.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. HAV/21UD/MNR/2025/0797

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 18A [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

[NAME] [NAME] Judge Cowan

Landlord [NAME] c/o [RESPONDENT], 28-30 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Mr & Mrs [NAME] & Jody McKenzie

1. The rent is: £ 1,000.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 26 October 2025

3. The amount included for services is not applicable n/a Per n/a

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 26 November 2018

5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

8. Description of premises First floor flat.

[NAME] of Decision 12 December 2025

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : HAV/21UD/MNR/2025/0797 Property : 18A [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant Tenant : Mr [COUNSEL] & Ms [COUNSEL] :

None

Respondent Landlord : Ms [COUNSEL] [NAME] : [COUNSEL] [RESPONDENT] of Application :

Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988

Tribunal Members : [NAME] [NAME] Judge Cowan

Date of Application : 23rd October 2025 Date of Decision : 12th December 2025

DECISION

HAV/21UD/MNR/2025/0797

SUMMARY REASONS

Decision

On 12th December 2025 the Tribunal directed that a new rent of £1,000 per month for the property should take effect from 26th October 2025. Background 1. On 12th October 2025 the Landlord’s Agent served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,175 per month in place of the existing rent of £930 per month to take effect from 26th October 2025.

2. On 23rd October 2025 under Section 13(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988, the Tenants referred the Landlord’s notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal for determination of a market rent.

3. On 4th November 2025 the Tribunal issued Directions clearly setting out dates for the parties to make any representation to the Tribunal. The Landlord was required to send a completed Statement to the Tribunal by 18th November 2025 and the Tenant was required to submit a Statement by 2nd December 2025. Inspection 4. The Tribunal did not inspect the property but considered this case based on the papers provided by the parties and information freely available on the internet. Evidence

5. The Landlord’s Agent submitted a Statement dated 6th November 2025 and the Tenant submitted a Statement on 1st December 2025.

6. On 5th December 2025 the Landlord’s Agent submitted a response to the Tenant’s statement. Given that this was outside the time set by the Tribunal, on 10th December 2025 the Tribunal e-mailed the Agent requesting a Case Management Application be filed by 5pm 11th December 2025, this being the date immediately before the Tribunal’s decision. No Application was received.

7. In considering the papers provided the Tribunal first had to determine whether the Agent’s submission of 5th December 2025 should be admitted.

8. Given the facts that these papers were submitted outside the timetable set in the original Directions and that the Agent had not submitted the Case Management Application within the second date specified the Tribunal determined that it would not accept this late submission.

9. The Tribunal has considered the original written submissions provided by the Parties which had been copied to the opposing Party.

HAV/21UD/MNR/2025/0797

Determination and Valuation 10. Having given consideration to the comparable evidence provided by the parties and of its own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, the Tribunal determines that the open market rent for the property in good tenantable condition would be £1,175 per calendar month.

11. Such a tenancy would normally include white goods, carpets, curtains/blinds and associated fittings to all be provided by the Landlord.

12. In this case the property is not let in such condition so some adjustments to the ‘open market rent’ are necessary. In particular the Tribunal has made the adjustments for the dated bathroom in disrepair and general wants of repair to include damp and mould issues throughout the property.

13. The full valuation is shown below: Full open market rent in good condition £1,175 Less deductions for:- Dated bathroom in poor condition

£50 General wants of repair, damp and mould

£125

____ TOTAL RENT PAYABLE PER MONTH

£1,000

14. The Tribunal therefore decided that the rent at which the subject property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing Landlord under the terms of this assured tenancy was £1,000 per month.

15. The Tenant had requested that due to financial hardship the starting date for the new rent should be later than the date specified in the Notice.

16. Whilst sympathetic to the Tenant’s position the Tenant had not submitted sufficient evidence for the Tribunal to determine that the effective date should vary from the date specified in the Notice.

17.

Accordingly, the Tribunal directed that the new rent of £1,000 per month should take effect from 26th October 2025.

APPEAL PROVISIONS

These summary reasons are provided to give the parties an indication as to how the Tribunal made its decision. If either party wishes to appeal this decision, they should first make a request for full reasons and the details of how to appeal will be set out in the full reasons. Any request for full reasons should be made within a month. Any subsequent application for permission to appeal should be made on Form RP PTA.

📊 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 property's open market rent in good condition was determined to be £1,175 per month based on comparable evidence and the Tribunal's knowledge.
  • A deduction of £50 was applied because the bathroom was dated and in poor condition.
  • A deduction of £125 was made for general disrepair, including damp and mould issues throughout the property.
  • The Tribunal decided the reasonable rent for the property was £1,000 per month.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The landlord's agent's submission on 5th December 2025 was not accepted because it was submitted outside the set timetable.

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 rent from £1,175 to £1,000 per 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 market comparables.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 section 14 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the condition of the property and the market comparables.

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 may also seek a rent adjustment based on the property's condition and market comparables.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Statements from both the tenant and the landlord mattered.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions like this can be appealed to a higher court.

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

It is always recommended to get advice from a qualified solicitor for cases like this.

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.