VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Rent for Property

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on a fair a person for a property, setting it at £2,806.50 per month. This decision was made using a specific formula under the a person Act 1977, taking into account the property's condition and the retail price index.

⚖️ Legal holding

The capped fair rent is determined according to the formula prescribed in the Housing Act 1977.

Topics

fair rent determinationRent Act 1977retail price index

Provisions

Rent Act 1977 Schedule 11Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the fair rent based on the Housing Act 1977 and applied the Rent Officer (Rent Officer) Order 1999 to cap the rent at £2,806.50 per calendar month.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined a fair rent of £2,806.50 per calendar month for a property, applying the Maximum Fair Rent formula under the Rent Act 1977. The decision was based on the retail price index and the property's condition.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

FR24 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. HS/LON/00AW/F77/2024/0085

Notice of the Tribunal [NAME] 1977 Schedule 11

Address of Premises The Tribunal members were First Floor Flat 17, St. [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Judge Tueje Mrs Flynn MA [APPELLANT]

Tenant Mrs [APPELLANT]

1. The fair [NAME] is £2,806.50 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3&4)

2. The effective date is 02 September 2024

3. The amount for services is Not applicable Per

negligible/not applicable

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

Not applicable Per

negligible/not applicable

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

The registered [NAME] relates to the total amount payable for the lower ground floor and first floor flats

8. For information only:

(a) The fair [NAME] to be registered is the maximum fair [NAME] as prescribed by the [NAME] ([NAME]) Order 1999. The [NAME] that would otherwise have been registered was £2,806.50 per calendar month.

Chairman Judge Tueje

Date of decision 2nd September 2024

FR24 [NAME] FIGURE X 387.5

PREVIOUS RPI FIGURE Y 260.6

X 387.5 Minus Y 260.6 = (A) 126.9

(A) 126.9 Divided by Y 260.6 = (B) 0.486953

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) 1.536953

Last registered [NAME]* 1826 Multiplied by (C) = 2806.48 *(exclusive of any variable service charge)

Rounded up to nearest 50p = 2806.50

Variable service charge NO If YES add amount for services

[NAME] = £2807.50 Per Cal 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].

1

Case Reference

: HS/LON/00AW/F77/2024/0085

Property : Lower Ground Floor Flat and [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant

: Mrs [APPELLANT]

Landlord : [RESPONDENT] of Objection : 8th January 2024

Type of Application : Section 70, [NAME] 1977

Tribunal

: Judge Tueje

Mrs A Flynn MA MRICS

Date of Summary Reasons

: 2nd September 2024

_______________________________________________

DECISION

The sum of £2806.50 per calendar month will be registered as the fair [NAME] with effect from 2nd September 2024, being the date the Tribunal made the Decision. ____________________________________

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

SUMMARY REASONS

Background 1. 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 carried out an inspection of the property on 2nd September 2024.

Evidence 3. The Tribunal has considered the written submissions provided by the Tenant, and the written and oral submissions made by the Landlord’s representative.

Determination and Valuation 4. Having considered the comparable evidence provided on behalf of the Landlord, and our own [NAME], general knowledge of rental values in the area, we consider that the open market [NAME] for the property in good tenantable condition would be in the region of £6,000 for both components of the property, namely £3,500 per calendar month for the first floor and £2,500 per calendar month for the lower ground floor. From this level of [NAME] we have made adjustments to reflect the unmodernised condition of the property. The global adjustment for both components of the property amounts to £1,975.00

5. The Tribunal has also made an adjustment for scarcity.

6. The full valuation is shown below:

[NAME]

£6,000 per calendar month

Less adjustments for the condition

(£1,975)

Adjusted market [NAME]

£4,025

Less Scarcity

approx. 20% (£805)

£3,220

7. Before the landlord carried out repairs to the property, which condition the Tribunal had not inspected, the [NAME] would have been £3,180 per calendar month.

8. The difference between the [NAME] for the unimproved condition of the property (i.e. before repairs were done), and the improved condition of the property (i.e. after repairs where done), is £140. £140 is less than 15% of the [NAME] previously registered for the property, which was £1,826.00.

3

Decision

9. The uncapped fair [NAME] initially determined by the Tribunal, for the purposes of section 70, was £3,220 per calendar month. The capped [NAME] for the property according to the provisions of the [NAME] ([NAME]) Order 1999 is calculated at £2,806.50 per calendar month. The calculation of the capped [NAME] is shown on the decision form. In this case the lower [NAME] of £2,806.50 per calendar month is to be registered as the fair [NAME] for this property.

Chairman: Judge Tueje

Date: 2nd September 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 request for full reasons should be made within a month. 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 fair rent based on the Retail Price Index.
  • The fair rent is determined according to the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999.
  • The tribunal considers the property's characteristics and local housing market conditions.
  • The fair rent calculation follows the guidelines set by the Rent Acts.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

It set the fair rent for a property at £2,806.50 per month.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court used a formula under the Rent Act 1977 to determine the fair rent, considering the property's condition and the retail price index.

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 application of the Maximum Fair Rent formula.

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 can expect their fair rent to be determined similarly, based on the property's condition and the retail price index.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Comparable evidence and the property's condition were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions like this can be appealed through the appropriate legal channels.

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

It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving fair rent determinations.

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.