VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Assured Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on a new rent of £1,500 per month for an assured periodic tenancy after considering comparable evidence and local rental values. The decision was made to ensure a fair market rent for the tenant.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent for their assured periodic tenancy based on comparable evidence and local rental values.

Topics

tenancy agreementsrent determinationsfair market rent

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

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 comparable evidence and local rental values. The new rent should reflect what a willing landlord would charge for a similar property under an assured periodic tenancy.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on comparable evidence and local rental values.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined a new rent of £1,500 per calendar month for an assured periodic tenancy based on comparable evidence and local rental values. The decision took effect from 12 September 2025.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00AK/MNR/2025/0795

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 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

[NAME] [RESPONDENT], 5-11 Green Lanes, [ADDRESS], London, [POSTCODE]

Tenant Mr [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 1500 Per Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 12 September 2025

*3. The amount included for services is/is

negligible/not applicable Nil Per Month

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 14th February 2025

6. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

7. Allocation of liability for repairs In accordance with Agreement terms

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

9. Description of premises A third floor studio flat in purpose built offices constructed in 1980’s, since converted in 2022 into 76 small studio flats. Located in Enfield Town adjacent railway station and bus routes. Block is on 4 levels excluding any basement. Brick wall finish, lead mansard roofing to 4th floor. Flat is a single room/ kitchen with shower/Wc. with approximately 22m2 GIA. Double glazed windows. Under floor heating provided from communal system. On road parking restrictions and no off street parking. Lift in block.

[NAME] of Decision 12 September 2025

1

Case Reference

: LON/00AK/MNR/2025/0795

Property : 50 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Tenant

: Mr [APPELLANT]

Landlord : [APPELLANT] of Objection : 27 June 2025

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

Tribunal

: [NAME] Valuer

Date of Summary Reasons

: 12 September 2025

_______________________________________________

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £1,500 per calendar month with effect from 12 September 2025. ____________________________________

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023 FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

SUMMARY REASONS

Background 1. On 4 April 2025 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,500 in place of the existing rent of £1,125 per month to take effect from 13 May 2025.

2. 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.

Evidence 4. The Tribunal has consideration of the written submissions provided by the Tenant and the Landlord.

Determination and Valuation 5. Having consideration of the comparable evidence proved by the parties and of our own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, we consider that the open market rent for the property in its would be in the region of £1,530 per calendar month. From this level of rent we have made adjustments to reflect any tenant improvements, tenant furniture and floor coverings, dilapidation and obsolescence at the property.

6. The full valuation is shown below:

3

Decision 8. 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 £1,530 per calendar month.

9. The Tribunal directed the new rent of £1,500 to take effect on 12 September 2025. The Tribunal was satisfied that a starting date of that specified in the Landlord’s notice would cause the tenant undue hardship. Details of likely hardship arising from the rent increase were given by the tenant.

Chairman: [NAME]: 12 September 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 subsequent application for permission to appeal should be made on Form RP PTA. You can only appeal if the First-tier Tribunal decision was wrong on one or more points of law and you must say why the First-tier Tribunal was wrong in law.

📊 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 is entitled to a fair market rent based on comparable evidence.
  • The tenant is entitled to a fair market rent adjusted for specific property conditions.
  • The tenant is entitled to a fair market rent based on the condition and location of the property.
  • The tenant is entitled to a fair market rent for their assured periodic tenancy.
  • The landlord must determine the open market rent by reference to comparable properties.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal determined a new rent of £1,500 per month for an assured periodic tenancy.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved in the case.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on comparable evidence and local rental values to determine a fair market rent.

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 evidence of comparable rents in the area.

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

The decision was for the tenant who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation may also seek a fair market rent determination through the First-tier Tribunal.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Comparable evidence of rental values in the area mattered.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a decision like this can be appealed if there are grounds to believe the decision was wrong on a point of law.

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

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

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.