First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Rent After Tenant Improvements
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided on a fair a person of £610 per month for a tenant after taking into account the improvements made to the property and the current rental market conditions.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a fair a person adjustment based on improvements made and market conditions.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal adjusted the proposed a person after considering improvements made by the tenant and scarcity in the rental market.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined a fair rent of £610 per month for a tenant after considering improvements made to the property and market conditions.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
Case Reference
: BIR/00CT/F77/2024/0630
Property : 39 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Tenant
: Mr [APPELLANT]
Landlord : [APPELLANT] of Application : Section 70 [NAME] 1977
Tribunal Members : [NAME]. [NAME]. [NAME]. [NAME]. FRICS
Date of Decision : 13th February 2025
_______________________________________________
DECISION
The sum of £610.00 per month will be registered as the fair [NAME] with effect from 13th February 2025 being the date the Tribunal made the Decision. ____________________________________
FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
2
REASONS FOR THE DECISION
Background
1. On 31st October 2024, the [NAME] registered a [NAME] of £607.00 per calendar month, effective from 8th December 2024. Following an objection from the Landlord to the determination of a fair [NAME] by the [NAME], the Tribunal has made a determination under the provisions of the [NAME] 1977.
Inspection
2. The Tribunal did not inspect the property but considered this case on the basis of the papers provided by the parties and having regard to its own knowledge, expertise and online research.
Evidence
3. The Tribunal has considered the written submissions provided by the Tenant and the Landlord. From the information provided it appears that the subject property comprises a semi-detached, 3-bedroom, double-glazed & centrally heated dwelling with single timber frame garage, outside WC, stores, gardens to front and rear together with off-road parking.
4. The Tribunal notes that the heating, white goods and carpets & curtains have been provided by the Tenant.
5. The Tribunal further notes from the Tenant’s submissions that they have carried out extensive improvements including:-
Installed gas central heating in 2014 together with a gas fire and surround. Installed uPVC double glazing throughout including a new front door Replaced the bathroom suite and installed PVC wall panelling. Installed a fitted kitchen in2017. Re-slabbed the driveway. Erected a garden shed.
6. The Tenant has not submitted any comparable evidence. The Landlord has provided extracts of comparable open market lettings ranging from £1,250 to £1,450 per calendar month, Rightmove information, and a confirmation email from [NAME] in respect of the letting of [ADDRESS] on 25th November 2024 for £1,450 per calendar month and Black & Golds agency email
3 in respect of the letting of [ADDRESS] for £1350 per calendar month in August 2024.
Determination and Valuation
7. On consideration of the comparable evidence provided by the Landlords, that
forwarded by the [NAME] and the Tribunal’s own expert knowledge of rental
values in the area, the Tribunal considers that the open market [NAME] for the
property in a satisfactory condition would be in the region of £1,350 per month.
From this level of [NAME], the Tribunal has made adjustments in relation to the
following:
a) The condition of the property b) Improvements made by the Tenant as outlined in Para.5. above c) Curtains, carpets and white goods fitted by the Tenant. d) The Tenant’s liability to redecorate.
8. The Tribunal has also made an adjustment for scarcity using their own general
knowledge and experience. The Tribunal considers that in the wider geographical
area there is an imbalance of supply and demand impacting on rental values and
has, therefore, made a reduction of 15% for scarcity.
9. The full valuation is shown below: Per month
[NAME]
£1350
Less a) Items given under a) above
£50.00
b) Items given under b) above
£345.00 c) Items given under c) above
£80.00 d) Scarcity @ 15% on deducting a) - c) above
£131.25
e) Tenant’s decoration liability @ 5% of market [NAME] £67.50
£673.75
£676.25 Say
£676.50
Maximum uncapped fair [NAME] therefore
£676.50
10. The Tribunal determines an uncapped fair [NAME] of £676.50 per month on adopting scarcity at 15% of the amended [NAME] following consideration of s70 (3) [NAME] 1977.
4
Decision
12. The uncapped fair [NAME] determined by the Tribunal, for the purposes of section 70, is therefore £676.50 per month. However, the maximum fair [NAME] permitted by the [NAME] ([NAME]) Order 1999 is £610.00 per month which therefore limits the fair [NAME] to be registered. The calculation of the capped [NAME] is shown on the decision form.
13. The [NAME] to be registered is therefore £610.00 per calendar month with effect from 13th February 2025.
Chairman: [NAME]: 13th February 2025
APPEAL PROVISIONS
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 statement of reasons (regulation 52 (2) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013) stating the grounds upon which it is intended to rely in the appeal.
5 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No.
BIR/00CT/F77/2024/0630
Notice of the Tribunal [NAME] 1977 Schedule 11
Address of Premises The Tribunal members were 39 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
[NAME]. [RESPONDENT] [NAME]. [NAME]. FRICS
Landlord [APPELLANT]
Tenant Mr [APPELLANT]
1. The fair [NAME] is £610.00 Per month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3&4)
2. The effective date is 13th February 2025
3. The amount for services is N/A Per -
4. The amount for fuel charges (excluding heating and lighting of common parts) not counting for [NAME] allowance is
N/A Per -
5. The [NAME] is not to be registered as variable.
6. The capping provisions of the [NAME] ([NAME]) Order 1999 apply (please see calculation overleaf).
7. Details (other than [NAME]) where different from [NAME] entry
8. For information only:
The fair [NAME] to be registered is the maximum fair as prescribed by the [NAME] ([NAME]) Order 1999. The [NAME] that would have otherwise been registered was £676.50 per month.
[NAME]. FRICS Date of decision 13th February 2025
6 [NAME] FIGURE X 392.1
PREVIOUS RPI FIGURE Y 358.3
X 392.1 Minus Y 358.3 = (A) 33.80
(A) 33.80 Divided by Y 358.3 = (B) 0.0943
First application for re-registration since 1 February 1999 YES/NO
If yes (B) plus 1.075 = (C)
If no (B) plus 1.05 = (C) 1.1443
Last registered [NAME]* £533 Multiplied by (C) = £609.93 *(exclusive of any variable service charge)
Rounded up to nearest 50p = £610.00
Variable service charge NO If YES add amount for services
[NAME] = £610.00 Per month Explanatory Note
1. The calculation of the maximum fair [NAME], in accordance with the formula contained in the Order, is set out above.
2. In summary, the formula provides for the maximum fair [NAME] to be calculated by:
(a) increasing the previous registered [NAME] by the percentage change in the retail price index (the RPI) since the date of that earlier registration and
(b) adding a further 7.5% (if the present application was the first since 1 February 1999) or 5% (if it is a second or subsequent application since that date).
A 7.5% increase is represented, in the calculation set out above, by the addition of 1.075 to (B) and an increase of 5% is represented by the addition of 1.05 to (B).
The result is rounded up to the nearest 50 pence.
3. For the purposes of the calculation the latest RPI figure (x) is that published in the calendar month immediately before the month in which the Tribunal’s fair [NAME] determination was made.
4. The process differs where the tenancy agreement contains a variable service charge and the [NAME] is to be registered as variable under section 71(4) of the [NAME] 1977. In such a case the variable service charge is removed before applying the formula. When the amount determined by the application of the formula is ascertained the service charge is then added to that sum in order to produce the maximum fair [NAME].
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Entitled to Adjusted Fair Rent Due to Improvements
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Entitled to Adjusted Fair Rent Based on Improvements and Market Cond…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Rent of £610 Per Month
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Fair Rent for Crondall Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Reduces Proposed Rent After Considering Property Condition and Ten…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Market Rent Adjustment Based on Property Condition and Improvements
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Fair Rent After Landlord's Increase Notice
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £760 PCM
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 made improvements to the property.
- Market conditions were considered in determining the rent.
- The property's condition was taken into account.
- Recent improvements were acknowledged in the rent adjustment.
- Local rental values influenced the decision.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal set a fair rent of £610 per month for the tenant.
Who was involved?
The tenant requested a fair rent adjustment, while the landlord objected to the initial rent determination.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court considered the improvements made by the tenant and the scarcity in the rental market to determine the fair rent.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Rent Act 1977 and the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The tenant's improvements to the property were a significant factor in determining the fair rent.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was in favour of the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should consider the improvements they've made to their property when requesting a fair rent adjustment.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The tenant's documentation of improvements and comparable rental data provided by the landlord were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Either party can apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal on any point of law arising from this decision.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving fair rent determinations.
