Tribunal sets £281.25/month rent for assured tenancy in Newcastle
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided on a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy, taking into account the current market value and specific conditions of the property, setting the rent at £281.25 per week.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a rent that reflects the open market value adjusted for specific property conditions.
📖 What the law says
Under this rule, a tenant with an assured tenancy can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent they pay. However, the application cannot be made if the rent is already set by a previous decision under this section or if more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy. Additionally, a tenant can also challenge a new rent proposed in a notice under sections 13(2) or 13A(2). When determining the rent, the tribunal considers what a willing landlord would charge for a similar property in the open market, taking into account the same terms and conditions as the current 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 market conditions and adjustments.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on the open market value and adjustments for specific property conditions, resulting in a rent of £281.25 per week.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. HS/LON/00BE/MNR/2024/0061
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 35 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
[NAME] Valuer
Landlord [RESPONDENT], St. [ADDRESS], Newcastle upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, [POSTCODE]
Tenant Mr [APPELLANT]
1. The rent is: £ 281.25 Per Week (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 5 February 2024
*3. The amount included for services is not applicable Not applicable Per
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 11 October 2011
6. Length of the term or rental period Monthly
7. Allocation of liability for repairs In accordance with tenancy agreement
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None
9. Description of premises A two bedroomed two storey terraced house situated in an established residential area.
[NAME] of Decision 22 May 2024
1
Case Reference
: LON/00AY/MNR/2024/0044
Property : 35 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tenant
: Mr [APPELLANT]
Landlord : [APPELLANT] of Application : Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988
Tribunal
: [NAME] Valuer 79475
Date of Summary Reasons
: 22 May 2024
_______________________________________________
DECISION
The Tribunal determines a rent of £281.25 per month with effect from 5 February 2024. ____________________________________
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023
FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
2
SUMMARY REASONS
Background 1. On 2 November 2023 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £295 in place of the existing rent of £277 per week to take effect from 5 February 2024
2. On 1 February 2024 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.
Evidence 4. There were no written submissions from the parties.
Determination and Valuation 5. Having consideration of our own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, we consider that the open market rent for the property in its current condition would be in the region of £450 per week. From this level of rent we have made adjustments to reflect tenant improvements, tenant furniture and floor coverings, dilapidation and obsolescence at the property.
6. The full valuation is shown below:
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 £281.25 per week.
9. The Tribunal directed the new rent of £281.25 to take effect on 5 February 2024. This being the date as set out in the Landlord’s Notice of Increase.
3
Chairman: [NAME]: 22 May 2024
APPEAL PROVISIONS
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. 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 should they decide to pursue this matter. 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.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Higher Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal sets £1440/month rent for assured tenancy in Newcastle
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition and Comparable Evidence
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Basement Flat
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Set for Assured Tenancy Based on Market Conditions
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal sets £1350/month rent for assured tenancy in London
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal sets £2227.50/month rent for assured tenancy in London
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets £1387.50 Monthly Rent for Assured Tenancy in London
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets £1,897.50 Monthly Rent for Assured Tenancy in Staines-upon-Th…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets £2125/month Rent for Assured Tenancy in London
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal sets £2,200/month rent for assured tenancy in London
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 own expert knowledge of rental values in the area to determine the market rent.
- The Tribunal adjusted the market rent to account for improvements made by the tenant.
- The Tribunal adjusted the market rent to reflect the tenant's furniture and floor coverings.
- The Tribunal adjusted the market rent due to the property's dilapidation and obsolescence.
- The new rent was set to take effect on the date specified in the landlord's notice of increase.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord's proposed new rent of £295 per week was not accepted by the Tribunal.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal set a new rent of £281.25 per week for the assured tenancy.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was over the proposed increase in rent from £277 to £295 per week.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to set the rent at £281.25 per week, considering the open market value and adjustments for tenant improvements and furniture.
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 valuation of the property based on the open market value and adjustments for specific conditions.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant, setting a lower rent than the landlord proposed.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may also seek a fair rent adjustment based on the open market value and specific property conditions.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the exact evidence or documents used, but it likely included valuations and tenancy agreements.
