First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Rent for Regulated Tenancy

OUTCOME: Allowed

FR24 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. BIR/00CN/F77/2024/0034

Notice of the Tribunal Decision

Rent Act 1977 Schedule 11

Address of Premises The Tribunal members were 16 High Brow, Harborne [POSTCODE]

[NAME] Mrs [RESPONDENT] Mrs [RESPONDENT]

Landlord BPT ([APPELLANT]) Limited c/o [APPELLANT]

Tenant [NAME] [RESPONDENT] and [NAME] [RESPONDENT]

1. The fair rent is £177.00 Per week (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 not limited by the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999, because it is below the maximum fair rent of £ per including £ per for services (variable) prescribed by the Order.

[NAME] of decision 31/10/2024

FR24 MAXIMUM FAIR RENT CALCULATION

LATEST RPI FIGURE X 389.9

PREVIOUS RPI FIGURE Y 337.1

X 389.9 Minus Y 337.1 = (A) 52.8 (A) 52.8 Divided by Y 337.1 = (B) 0.1566

First application for re-registration since 1 February 1999 NO

If yes (B) plus 1.075 = (C)

If no (B) plus 1.05 = (C) 1.2066

Last registered rent* £150.00 Multiplied by (C) = 180.99 *(exclusive of any variable service charge)

Rounded up to nearest 50p = £181.00

Variable service charge NO If YES add amount for services

MAXIMUM FAIR RENT = £181.00 Per Week

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/OOCN/F77/2024/0034 Property : 16 High Brow Harborne [POSTCODE]

Applicant : [redacted] Representative : [RESPONDENT] 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 : [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 Applicant Landlord applied to the Rent Officer for registration of a fair rent of £180.00 per week for the property 16 High Brow, Harborne, [POSTCODE]. The rent payable at the time of the application was stated as being 150.00 per week.

2. The rent was previously registered at a rental of £150.00 per week with effect from 27th May 2022 following a registration by the Rent Officer.

3. The Rent Officer registered a rental of £160.00 per week with effect from 27th May 2024.

4. By letter dated 28th 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 terraced house with hallway, two reception rooms, kitchen, store and covered yard on the ground floor. On the first floor the landing leads to three bedrooms and bathroom with W.C.

8. There are gardens, a car parking space, a garage and store.

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

EVIDENCE

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

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

THE APPLICANT’S SUBMISSIONS

12. The Applicant submitted that recent appeals in respect of properties in the area had resulted in increases in rent from 13.10% to 14.5%. They also submitted that a new

3 lounge window had been fitted at a cost of £4230.00. The copy invoice provided confirmed that this was fitted in September 2023.

13. As comparables, the Applicant referred to:

a) [ADDRESS], Harborne – a three-bedroom mid-terraced house with central heating currently marketed at £368.00 per week. b) West Pathway, Harborne – a three-bedroom mid-terraced house with central heating currently marketed at £380.00 per week. c) West Pathway, Harborne – a three-bedroom mid-terraced house with central heating currently marketed at £358.00 per week.

14. The Applicant submitted that in their opinion the rent proposed was below the rental value of the property.

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. Although the Tribunal did not receive any submissions from the Respondent tenant, it understands that the property has no double glazing and that carpets, curtains and white goods were provided by the tenant. It also understands that the kitchen and bathroom are unmodernised.

18. 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.

19. 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 £255.00 per week.

4 20. However, the actual property is not in the condition considered usual for a modern letting at a market rent. Therefore, it was first necessary to adjust the hypothetical rent of £255.00 per week to allow for the differences between the condition considered usual for such a letting and the condition of the actual property as described by the parties and the Rent Officer (disregarding the effect of any disrepair or other defects attributable to the tenant or any predecessor in title).

21. The Tribunal determined that the following weekly deductions were appropriate:

Kitchen upgrade 13.00 Bathroom upgrade 8.00 Double glazing 12.00 Total £33.00

22. The Tribunal then considered the improvements carried out by the Respondent tenant and assessed these as follows:

Carpets and curtains 10.00 White goods 8.00 Decorating liability 12.00 Total £30.00

23. The Tribunal then considered whether a property being to let in the open market was generally worth more than a Regulated tenancy. The Tribunal is of the opinion that a modern open market letting property is likely to be in better general condition than an older Regulated tenancy. Such a property is likely to have, for example, additional electrical sockets, more modern internal fittings and be generally better presented. In this case the Tribunal is of the opinion that a further deduction of £15.00 per week is appropriate.

24. 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.

25. 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.

26. 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 £177.00 per week (£255.00 - £33.00 - £30.00 - £15.00).

27. The Section 70 fair rent determined by the Tribunal is below the level of the maximum fair rent permitted by the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999 and accordingly that rent limit has no effect. Details of the maximum fair rent calculation have been provided.

5 DECISION

28. The fair rent determined by the Tribunal for the purposes of Section 70 was accordingly £177.00 per week.

APPEAL

29. 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)