VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Property

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on a fair market rent for a property after reviewing evidence and inspecting the premises. The rent was set at £1,800 per month, effective from September 4, 2023.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a rent that reflects the open market value of their property.

Topics

rent determinationmarket rent assessment

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 their tenancy. The tribunal will then determine a fair market rent based on what a willing landlord would charge for a similar property in the open market.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined a fair market rent for the property based on its condition and location.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal determined a fair market rent of £1,800 per month for a property, considering its condition and location. The Tribunal inspected the property and reviewed evidence from both parties.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00AC/MNR/2023/0349

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] [NAME]

Landlord [RESPONDENT] 2A [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Mr [APPELLANT] [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 1800 Per Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 4th September 2023

*3. The amount included for services is not applicable

Per

*4. Service charges are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 3rd March 2021

6. Length of the term or rental period 12 months

7. Allocation of liability for repairs In accordance with agreement

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

9. Description of premises A purpose built second floor flat built in 2017 comprising two bedrooms, living room, bathroom, kitchen, underfloor heating, allocated parking space.

[NAME] of Decision 18th January 2024

Case Reference

: LON/OOAC/MNR/2023/0349

Property : [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Tenant

: Mr [APPELLANT]

Landlord : [APPELLANT] of Tenants Objection : 3rd August 2023

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

Tribunal

: Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] of Summary Reasons

: 18th January 2024

_______________________________________________

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £1,800 per calendar month with effect from 4th September 2023. ___________________________________

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023

SUMMARY REASONS FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Background 1. On the 5th July 2023 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,900 per month in place of the existing rent of £1,700 per month to take effect from 4th September 2023. The rent set out in the tenancy agreement which commenced on the 3rd March 2021 was £1,500 per month.

2. On the 3rd August 2023 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 inspected the property on the 18th January 2023 at 11.30 am in the presence of the tenant, Mr [COUNSEL] confirmed a representative from the landlord’s letting agent [RESPONDENT] would be in attendance but he was not present. The inspection revealed the property to be in good condition, evidently built in 2017. The windows are double glazed, there is gas central heating. Carpets, curtains and white goods are provided by the landlord.

Evidence

4. The Tribunal has had consideration to the written submissions provided by the Landlord.

Determination and Valuation

5. In the first instance the Tribunal determined what rent the landlord could reasonably be expected to obtain for the property in the open market if it were let today in the condition that is considered usual for such an open market letting.

Based upon the evidence provided by the parties together with its expert knowledge of the area, the Tribunal consider that the subject property, if finished to a reasonable standard with modern kitchen and bathroom fittings and no damp problems would be likely to attract a rent let on an assured shorthold tenancy, for £1,800 per month.

6. The Tribunal determines a rent of £1, 800 per calendar month.

Decision

7. 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 £1,800 per calendar month.

8.The Tribunal directs the new rent of £1,800 to take effect on the 4th September 2023. This, being the date set out in the Landlord’s Notice of Increase and the

Tribunal was satisfied that a starting date of that specified in the Landlord’s notice would not cause the tenant undue hardship.

Chairman: [NAME]: 18th January 2024.

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.

📊 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 rent that reflects the open market value of their property.
  • The tenant is entitled to a fair market rent adjustment based on the property's condition.
  • The tenant is entitled to a rent reduction if the property is in disrepair.
  • The tenant is entitled to a rent adjustment based on their financial circumstances.
  • The tenant is entitled to have their rent set at a fair and reasonable level based on the property's current condition and market comparables.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal determined a fair market rent of £1,800 per month for the property.

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 the evidence provided and the inspection of the property's condition and location.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 section 14 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The condition and location of the property were crucial in determining the fair market rent.

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 First-tier Tribunal to determine a fair market rent for their property.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The condition of the property and its location were important pieces of evidence.

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 recommended to get legal advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent determination.

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.