VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Rent for Property

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on the fair rent for a property in Solihull. They used the Rent Act 1977 and the Retail Price Index to calculate the rent, which was capped at £826.00 per month.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair rent calculated according to the Retail Price Index and the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999.

Topics

fair rent calculationRetail Price Indextenancy regulation

Provisions

Rent Act 1977Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the fair rent for a property based on the Rent Act 1977 and the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined the fair rent for a property located in Solihull, based on the Rent Act 1977 and the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999. The fair rent was calculated using the Retail Price Index and capped according to the Order. The final fair rent was set at £826.00 per month.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

FR24 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. BIR/00CT/F77/2024/0025

Notice of the Tribunal Decision

Rent Act 1977 Schedule 11

Address of Premises The Tribunal members were 8 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

[NAME] [RESPONDENT] [NAME]

Landlord [APPELLANT]

[NAME] [APPELLANT]

1. The fair rent is £826.00 Per month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3&4)

2. The effective date is 31/10/2024

3. The amount for services is

Per

not applicable

4. The amount for fuel charges (excluding heating and lighting of common parts) not counting for rent allowance is

Per

not applicable

5. The rent is not to be registered as variable.

6. The capping provisions of the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999 apply (please see calculation overleaf).

7. Details (other than rent) where different from Rent Register entry

8. For information only:

The fair rent to be registered is the maximum fair rent as prescribed by the Rent Acts( Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999. The rent that would otherwise have been registered was £ 985.00 per month

Chairman [NAME] of decision 31/10/2024

FR24 MAXIMUM FAIR RENT CALCULATION

LATEST RPI FIGURE X 389.9

PREVIOUS RPI FIGURE Y 340.00

X 389.9 Minus Y 340.00 = (A) 49.9 (A) 49.9 Divided by Y 340.00 = (B) 0.1467

First application for re-registration since 1 February 1999 NO

If yes (B) plus 1.075 = (C)

If no (B) plus 1.05 = (C) 1.1967

Last registered rent* £690.00 Multiplied by (C) = £825.72 *(exclusive of any variable service charge)

Rounded up to nearest 50p = £826.00

Variable service charge NO If YES add amount for services

MAXIMUM FAIR RENT = £826.00 Per month

Explanatory Note

1. The calculation of the maximum fair rent, in accordance with the formula contained in the Order, is set out above.

2. In summary, the formula provides for the maximum fair rent to be calculated by:

(a) increasing the previous registered rent 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 rent determination was made.

4. The process differs where the tenancy agreement contains a variable service charge and the rent is to be registered as variable under section 71(4) of the Rent Act 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 rent.

1

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : BIR/OOCT/F77/2024/0025 Property : 8 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Applicant : [redacted] ([COMPANY]) Representative : None Respondent : [redacted] : None Type of application : Application under Section 70 of the Rent Act 1977 by the Applicant against the rent assessed for the property by the Rent Officer Tribunal members : Mr [NAME] (Chairman) [NAME] [NAME]/Hearing : Neither party requested an inspection or hearing Date of original decision : 31st October 2024

DETAILED REASONS

2 BACKGROUND

1. On 12th March 2024, the [NAME] applied to the Rent Officer for registration of a fair rent of £807.30 per month for the property 8 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]. The rent payable at the time of the application was stated as being £690.00 per month.

2. The rent was previously registered at a rental of £690.00 per month with effect from 8th June 2022 following a registration by the Rent Officer.

3. The Rent Officer registered a rental of £740.00 per month with effect from 8th June 2024.

4. By letter dated 21st May 2024, the Applicant objected to the rent determined by the Rent Officer and the matter was referred to the Tribunal.

5. The Tribunal made a determination of the rent payable on 31st October 2024 and these Detailed Reasons are given in response to a request for same by the Applicant.

INSPECTION

6. Neither party requested the Tribunal to carry out an inspection of the property and the determination was therefore made based upon the submissions received by the Tribunal.

7. Based on the submissions provided, the Tribunal understands that the property comprises of a semi-detached house with one reception room and kitchen on the ground floor. On the first floor the landing leads to three bedrooms and bathroom.

8. There are gardens, a car parking space, store and outside W.C.

9. The Tribunal understands that the property is modernised and has central heating.

EVIDENCE

10. The Tribunal received written representations from the Respondent. These were copied to the Applicant. No submissions were received from the Applicant.

11. Neither party requested a hearing and the matter was therefore dealt with by a paper determination.

THE RESPONDENT’S SUBMISSIONS

12. The Respondent submitted that she had lived in the property for 43 years and had never been in arrears. She was of the opinion that the amount requested by the Respondent was unreasonable. If the rent increased, she would be compelled to obtain Housing Benefit.

13. The Respondent submitted photographs of the property which were appreciated by the Tribunal.

14. The Respondent further submitted that she had carried out improvements to the property including a fitted gas fire, greenhouse and shed, fitted wardrobes and

3 removed the wall between to make one reception room together with general upgrades.

THE LAW

15. When determining a fair rent, the Tribunal, in accordance with the Rent Act 1977, Section 70, had regard to all the circumstances including the age, location and state of repair of the property. It also disregarded the effect of (a) any relevant Tenant’s improvements and (b) the effect of any disrepair or other defect attributable to the Tenant or any predecessor in title under the Regulated Tenancy on the rental value of the property.

16. In [COMPANY] v Chairman of the Greater Manchester, etc. Committee [1995] 28HLR107 and [NAME] v [NAME] [1999] QB92 the Court of Appeal emphasised (a) that ordinarily a fair rent is the market rent for the property discounted for ‘scarcity’ (i.e. that element, if any, of the market rent, that is attributable to there being a significant shortage of similar properties in the wider locality available for letting on similar terms – other than as to rent – to that of the regulated tenancy) and (b) that for the purposes of determining the market rent assured tenancy (market) rents were usually appropriate comparables. (These rents may have to be adjusted where necessary to reflect any relevant differences between those comparables and the subject property).

VALUATION

17. In the first instance, the Tribunal determined what rent the Applicant 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 open market lettings. It did this by having regard to the Tribunal’s own general knowledge of market rent levels in the area of Birmingham.

18. Having taken the various matters into consideration it determined that the open market value of the property in good condition would be the sum of £1,200.00 per month.

19. The Tribunal then considered the improvements carried out by the [NAME] and assessed these as follows:

Carpets and curtains 40.00 White goods 30.00 Gas Fire 10.00 Through Lounge/dining room 20.00 Fitted wardrobes 20.00 Greenhous/shed 15.00 General upgrades 20.00 Decorating liability 60.00 Total £215.00

20. The Tribunal then considered the question of scarcity. This is done by considering whether the number of persons genuinely seeking to become tenants of similar properties in the wider area of the West Midlands on the same terms other than rent is substantially greater than the availability of such dwellings as required by section 70(2) of the Rent Act 1977.

4 21. The Tribunal finds that many Landlords dispute that scarcity exists because they are of the opinion that the market is ‘in balance’. Although Tenants do not in all cases have difficulty in finding accommodation this ignores the fact that it is the price of such accommodation which creates a balance in the market. Section 70(2) specifically excludes the price of accommodation from consideration in determining whether there are more persons genuinely seeking to become Tenants of similar properties than there are properties available. Although the rental market for Assured Shorthold properties may be in balance many potential Tenants may be excluded from it for various reasons such as age, poor credit history or because they are on housing benefit.

22. In this case the Tribunal, having carried out appropriate research, is satisfied that it is not appropriate to make a deduction for scarcity. This leaves a fair rent for the subject property of £985.00 per month (£1,200.00 - £215.00)

23. The Section 70 fair rent determined by the Tribunal is above the level of the maximum fair rent permitted by the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999 and accordingly the rent is therefore determined at £826.00 per month being the amount of the Maximum Fair Rent Order.

DECISION

24. The fair rent determined by the Tribunal for the purposes of Section 70 was accordingly £826.00 per month.

APPEAL

25. If either of the parties is dissatisfied with this decision, they may apply to this Tribunal for permission to appeal to the upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), on a point of law only. Any such application must be received within 28 days after these written reasons have been sent to them (Rule 52 of The Tribunal Procedure (First- tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013).

[NAME] First-tier Tribunal Property Chamber (Residential Property)

📊 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 rent calculated according to the Retail Price Index.
  • The tenant is entitled to a fair rent calculated according to the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999.
  • The tenant is entitled to a fair rent that reflects the market conditions and the state of repair of the property.
  • The tenant is entitled to a maximum fair rent calculated according to the Retail Price Index and the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

It decided on the fair rent for a property, setting it at £826.00 per month.

Who was involved?

The decision involved a landlord and a tenant.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court used the Rent Act 1977 and the Retail Price Index 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 argument that mattered most was the calculation method based on the Retail Price Index.

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

The decision was for the tenant, as the rent was set lower than initially proposed.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should consider the Retail Price Index and the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999 when calculating fair rent.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Photographs of the property and written representations from both parties were considered.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, either party can apply to the Upper Tribunal for permission to appeal on a point of law.

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

Yes, it's recommended to seek 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.