First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Rent for Property

OUTCOME: Allowed

FR24 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. CHI/00MS/F77/2024/0001

Notice of the Tribunal [NAME] 1977 Schedule 11

Address of Premises The Tribunal members were 68 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME] Mr [RESPONDENT] Mr [APPELLANT]

Landlord [APPELLANT]

Tenant Mrs [APPELLANT]

1. The fair [NAME] is £207.50 Per Week (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3&4)

2. The effective date is 22 February 2024

3. The amount for services is n/a Per n/a

not applicable

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

n/a Per n/a

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

8. For information only:

(a) The fair [NAME] to be registered is not limited by the [NAME] ([NAME]) Order 1999, because it is below the maximum fair [NAME] of £231.00 per Week prescribed by the Order.

[NAME] [NAME] of decision 22 February 2024

FR24 [NAME] FIGURE X 378.0

PREVIOUS RPI FIGURE Y 304.0

X 378.0 Minus Y 304.0 = (A) 74.0

(A) 74.0 Divided by Y 304.0 = (B) 0.243

First application for re-registration since 1 February 1999 NO

If yes (B) plus 1.075 = (C)

If no (B) plus 1.05 = (C) 1.293

Last registered [NAME]* £178.50 Multiplied by (C) = 230.80 *(exclusive of any variable service charge)

Rounded up to nearest 50p = £231.00

Variable service charge NO If YES add amount for services

[NAME] = £231.00 Per Week

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].

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : CHI/00MS/F77/2024/0001 Property : 68 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Applicants (Landlord)

: Mr [COUNSEL] : [NAME] Respondent (Tenant) : Mrs [COUNSEL] : None Type of application : Section 70 of the [NAME] 1977 Tribunal members : Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] : Paper determination Date of decision : 22nd February 2024

DECISION

2

The Tribunal determines £207.50 per week is to be registered as the fair [NAME] for the above property with effect from the 22nd February 2024 being the date of the Tribunal's decision.

The reasons for this decision are set out below.

Reasons

Background

On 2nd October 2023 the landlord, applied to the Valuation Office Agency ([NAME]) for registration of a fair [NAME] of £1,300 per month (£300 per week) for the property.

The [NAME] payable at the time of the application was £178.50 per week effective from 13th July 2021

On the 24th November 2023 the [NAME] registered a fair [NAME] of £205.00 per week, effective from the 24th November 2023. The [NAME] increase imposed by the [NAME] had not been “capped” or limited by the operation of the [NAME] ([NAME]) Order 1999 (the Order).

By an email dated 8th December 2023 from [RESPONDENT], on behalf of the landlord objected to the [NAME] determined by the [NAME] and the matter was referred to this Tribunal.

The law

When determining a fair [NAME] the Tribunal, in accordance with the [NAME] 1977, section 70, must have regard to all the circumstances including the age, location and state of repair of the property. It also must disregard the effect of (a) any relevant tenant's improvements and (b) the effect of any disrepair or other defect attributable to the tenant, on the rental value of the property. Section 70(2) of the [NAME] 1977 imposes on the Tribunal an assumption that the number of persons seeking to become tenants of similar dwelling house in the locality on the terms (other than those relating to [NAME]) of the regulated tenancy is not substantially greater than the number of such dwelling houses in the locality which are available for letting on such terms. This is commonly called ‘scarcity’.

[COMPANY] v [NAME] of the Greater Manchester Council (1995) 28 HLR 107 and [NAME] v [NAME] Tribunal [1999] QB 92 the Court of Appeal emphasised

(a) that ordinarily a fair [NAME] is the market [NAME] for the property discounted for 'scarcity' (i.e. that element, if any, of the market [NAME], that is attributable to there being a significant shortage of similar

3 properties in the wider locality available for letting on similar terms - other than as to [NAME] - to that of the regulated tenancy) and

(b) that for the purposes of determining the market [NAME], assured tenancy (market) rents are usually appropriate comparables. (These rents may have to be adjusted where necessary to reflect any relevant differences between those comparables and the subject property).

The [NAME] ([NAME]) Order 1999 places a “cap” on the permissible amount of the increase of a fair [NAME] between one registration and the next, by reference to the amount of the increase in the United Kingdom Index of Retail Prices between the dates of the two registrations. Where the cap applies the [NAME] and the Tribunal is prevented from increasing the amount of the fair [NAME] that it registers beyond the maximum fair [NAME] calculated in accordance with the provisions of the Order and the mathematical formula set out in the Order. By article 2(7) of the 1999 Order the capping provisions do not apply “in respect of a dwelling-house if because of a change in the condition of the dwelling- house or the common parts as a result of repairs or improvements (including the replacement of any fixture or fitting) carried out by the landlord or a superior landlord, the [NAME] that is determined in response to an application for registration of a new [NAME] under Part IV exceeds by at least 15% the previous [NAME] registered or confirmed.”

Facts found without Inspection.

The parties did not request the Tribunal to inspect the property and the Tribunal was satisfied this was not required and relied on information provided by the parties together with its expert knowledge.

The property is a semi-detached Victorian house located in an established residential area close to local amenities.

The accommodation comprises: 2 reception rooms, kitchen, 3 bedrooms, ground floor shower room. rear garden.

There is double glazing and partial gas central heating.

Terms of the tenancy

It is understood that this tenancy commenced on the 1st March 1985, although an agreement was not provided by the parties. It is agreed that the landlord is responsible for structural repairs and external decoration; the tenant is responsible for internal decorations. The property was let unfurnished.

4 Tenant's improvements and evidence

The landlord submitted written representations together with a generic Rightmove “Best Price Guide” which provided seven comparables which ranged from £1,300 pcm to £1,600 pcm. In addition, the landlord provided details of two further properties in [ADDRESS] and [ADDRESS] which were available to let at £1,500 pcm and £1,350 respectively.

The tenant confirms he installed the kitchen fittings in 2018, and the shower fittings also in 2018.

The [NAME].

The Tribunal had copies of the Valuation Office Agency correspondence and including the [NAME] registers effective 13th July 2021 and the most recent being the 24th November 2023 together with the calculations for the most recent registration.

Valuation

In the first instance the Tribunal determined what [NAME] 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 together with its expert knowledge, the Tribunal consider that the subject property, if finished to a reasonable standard would be likely to attract a [NAME] let on an assured shorthold tenancy, of £312 per week (£1,350 per month)

Next, the Tribunal needs to adjust that hypothetical [NAME] of £312 per week to allow for the differences between the terms of this tenancy and the lack of white goods, carpets and curtains, tenants internal decoration responsibility, dated kitchen and shower fittings and partial central heating (disregarding the effect of tenant’s improvements and any disrepair or other defect attributable to the tenant).

The Tribunal has considered very carefully the parties’ submissions and the notes prepared by the [NAME].

Using our own expertise the Tribunal considered that deductions of approximately 30% should applied in order to take into account the terms of the tenancy and condition of the property. This provides a deduction of £93.60 per week from the hypothetical [NAME]. This reduces the figure to £218.40 per week.

It should be noted that this figure cannot be a simple arithmetical calculation and is not based upon capital costs but is the Tribunal’s estimate of the amount by which the [NAME] would need to be reduced to attract a tenant.

5

Scarcity

Thirdly, the Tribunal then went on to consider whether a deduction falls to be made to reflect scarcity within the meaning of section 70(2) of the 1977 Act. The tribunal followed the decision of the High Court in [COMPANY] v [NAME], in which it was held that scarcity over a wide area should be considered rather than scarcity in relation to a particular locality.

In the Tribunals opinion there should be a deduction of 5% for scarcity as it is considered that demand outweighs supply for rented properties in the area. Applying this deduction of £10.92 produces a rental figure of £207.50.

Conclusion

The capping provisions of the [NAME] ([NAME]) Order do not apply and therefore the above figure applies. For information, the capped fair [NAME] in accordance with the attached calculations is £231 per week. For the tenant’s information, this calculated figure is based upon the latest RPI figure and therefore there has been an increase since the [NAME] Officers registered [NAME].

Therefore, £207.50 per week is the fair [NAME] to be registered limited by the [NAME] ([NAME]) Order 1999 with effect from the 22nd February 2024 being the date of the Tribunals decision.

Detailed calculations are provided attached to this decision form.

[NAME]

6th February 2024

6 Rights of appeal

By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, the tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may have. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), then a written application for permission must be made to the First- tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with the case. The application for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office within 28 days after the tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the person making the application. If the application is not made within the 28-day time limit, such application must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28-day time limit; the tribunal will then look at such reason(s) and decide whether to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the tribunal to which it relates (i.e. give the date, the property and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party making the application is seeking. If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).