First-tier Tribunal Determines Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal determined that the market rent for an assured tenancy property should be set at £1,500 per month based on its condition and comparable rental values in Ashford. The tenants argued for a lower rent due to disrepair issues, but the tribunal considered these factors and adjusted accordingly.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord must determine the market rent of an assured property considering its condition, features, and comparable rental values in the area.
📖 What the law says
This section allows landlords to propose an increase in rent for assured periodic tenancies through a notice in a prescribed form. The notice must specify a new rent to take effect at the start of a new period, which begins at least two months after the notice is served.
A tenant can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under an assured tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the open-market rent the property could reasonably expect to fetch under similar conditions.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured tenancy based on comparable properties and conditions.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal determined the market rent of an assured property at £1,500 pcm based on its condition and comparable rental values in Ashford, Surrey. The tenants argued for a lower rent due to disrepair issues, while the landlord proposed £1,600 pcm.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed in Part
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
Case Reference
HAV/43UH/MNR/2026/0018
[ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tenants
Mr [COUNSEL] and [NAME] [COUNSEL]
Tenants’ Representative
None
Landlord
[RESPONDENT]
Landlord’s [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Landlord’s Representative
Mr [COUNSEL], [RESPONDENT] of Application
2 February 2026
Type of Application Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988
Tribunal Members [NAME] – [NAME] of Decision
25 March 2026
Rent Determined
£1,500 per calendar month
Date the new rent takes effect
25 February 2026
2
REASONS FOR THE DECISION
Background
1. On 9 December 2025, Mr [RESPONDENT] on behalf of the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 (‘the 1988 Act’) which proposed a new rent of £1,600 per calendar month(pcm) in place of the existing rent of £1,500 pcm to take effect from 25 February 2026.
2. On 2 February 2026, under Section 13(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988, the Tenants referred the Landlord’s notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal for determination of a market rent (form Rents 1, their application).
3. The assured tenancy commenced on 25 February 2025, for a term of one year. The rental period is monthly.
Allocation of Repairs between Landlord and Tenants.
4. The Tribunal has been provided with a copy of the tenancy agreement between the parties signed by each dated 18 February 2025 and 21 February 2025. The landlord is required to keep the structure of the premises in good repair. Similarly, the landlord is required to keep in good repair and proper working order any installations provided by the landlord for space heating, water heating, sanitations, for the supply of water, gas and electricity.
5. The tenants are responsible for internal painting, decorating, minor cracks and minor repairs only.
Services or furniture provided by Landlord (other than carpets and curtains and white goods specified below) and the costs relating to the same.
6. At section 7 (Furniture) and section 8 (Services) of their application, the tenants confirm that neither furniture nor any services are provided under the tenancy.
Liability for Council Tax
7. The Tenants are responsible for the payment of Council Tax in respect of the Property. The rent determined is exclusive of Council Tax.
Any other terms of the tenancy taken into consideration in determining the rent.
3
8. At under clause 2 of the tenancy agreement (the landlord’s obligations), paragraph 2.3 (iv) and (vi), the tenants are responsible for ‘…internal painting and decorating…and minor cracks or internal decoration (plasterwork).’
9. The tenants are also responsible for minor repairs (clause 3, paragraph 3.15).
Inspection/Hearing
10. Neither party requested an oral hearing. The Tribunal has considered this case on the bases of the papers provided by the parties, having viewed the property on the internet and its own knowledge and specialist expertise.
The Property
11. [ADDRESS] is a circa 2000’s purpose-built block of flats of brick construction, over ground and four upper floors. The property is a third floor flat, with no lift, offering accommodation described in the papers as follows:
Hall, living room/kitchen, two bedrooms and one bathroom/WC.
In addition, there is a garage.
12. The Tribunal has neither been provided with a copy of an inventory, nor information on the property’s benefits. From the photographs provided, the property is in a modern purpose-built block of flats, with central heating, double glazing, [NAME] wooden floors and carpets, curtains/window blinds and fully fitted kitchen and bathroom/WC.
The property is situated off [ADDRESS], Ashford. Ashford railway station is close by.
Evidence
13. [NAME] the Tenants and the Landlord’s representative returned the Tribunal’s Reply forms (forms Rents 1A and Rents 1B).
The Tenants.
14. The Tenants have made the following comments in their application, supporting statement (dated 20 January 2026) and Rents 1B form (dated 10 March 2026):
a) The property is on the third floor and there is no lift.
4
b) The tenants have neither carried out any improvement works nor replaced any fixtures, fittings nor furniture for which they are not responsible for under the tenancy agreement.
c) The parties’ allocations for repairs are as outlined in paragraphs 4 and 5 above.
d) The corridor doors (understood by the Tribunal to be those in the common parts) do not have locks which cause security concerns. The garage gate is frequently out of service, and the communal bin area is poorly maintained.
15. In terms of the market rent the tenants say it is £1,450 pcm and go on to add this reflects the condition and facilities of the property and is realistic. In their form Rents 1B in reply to the landlord’s form Rents 1A, section 2, paragraph 2.1, the box is blank.
The Landlord
16. Whereas Mr [RESPONDENT] has returned the Tribunal’s form Rents 1A, it is dated 10 March 2026 and thereby was given outside the 28 days’ time limit prescribed in form Rents 1.
a) Mr [NAME] has confirmed the various details given by the tenants in their application including the terms of the tenancy.
b) Mr [NAME] confirms he wishes to charge the rent proposed in the section 13(2) notice, but the box into which any evidence for him to rely on to support the proposed market rent is blank.
Determination and Valuation
17. Whereas the Tribunal has read all the contents of the bundle (the papers), it limits its discussion and considerations to those points relevant to reach its determination.
18. For these purposes the Tribunal is to determine the rent the property might reasonably be expected to let in the open market under an assured tenancy, which begins at the beginning of the new period specified in the notice, inter alia. The new period specified in the notice is 25 February 2026.
19. The tenants have informed the Tribunal that at the outset they had sought a longer-term agreement of two to three years to provide stability and go on to say the landlord’s proposed increase and the timing of it was not what they had
5
reasonably expected. The Tribunal notes at this juncture the tenancy agreement is in a standard format and the notice given under section 13(2) of the 1988 Act is valid.
20. Pursuant to the tenants’ application [NAME] have returned their respective forms to the Tribunal. The tenants have given limited submissions on their opinion of the market rent, £1,450 per calendar month. [NAME] have returned their respective forms (Rents 1A and Rents 1B), each has left the box into which their evidence on which they would seek to rely on blank.
21. Relying on its own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, and the limited submissions given by the tenants, the Tribunal considers that the market rental of the subject property in its modernised condition with the features as described to be in the order of £1,550.00 pcm. This is the rent we would expect the property to let for in the open market if it was in the same general condition as the comparable properties including having white goods and curtains provided by the landlord, which is the case here.
22. From this level of rent the Tribunal has made adjustments in relation to the following:
a) The tenants’ internal decorations and minor repairs obligation. b) The items of disrepair to the common areas, the intermittent inoperability of the garage door and the poor maintenance of the bin area.
The full valuation is shown below:
Starting Rent
£1,550.00 pcm
Less a) The tenants’ internal decorations etc.
£25.00 b) The items of disrepair etc.
£25.00
£50.00
Market rent
£1,500.00 pcm
Undue hardship
12. The new rent takes effect from the date specified in the landlord’s Notice of Increase unless that would cause undue hardship to the tenants. In cases of undue hardship, the Tribunal has a discretion to fix a later starting date up to the date a Tribunal makes its determination.
6
13. The tenants have given submissions that an increase in rent would cause them hardship, having a substantial financial impact on their household.
14. The landlord did not respond to the tenants’ application for postponement due to hardship.
15. As the Tribunal’s determination of the new rent is to reaffirm the initial (current) rent payable under the tenancy, the Tribunal is not required to give a determination on the question of any undue hardship caused to the tenants.
Decision
16. Therefore, the Tribunal determines the market rent at £1,500.00 per calendar month with effect from 25 February 2026.
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.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Determines Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal sets fair rent for Redcar property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent for Manchester Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Shorthold Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rental Rate for Manchester Flat
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Redcar Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Fair Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Adjusts Rent Due to Property Disrepair and Licensing Issues
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £600 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 rent must be assessed based on comparable rental values in the area.
- The rent should consider the actual condition of the property.
- The rent must reflect the fair market rate based on comparable properties in the area.
- The rent adjustment must take into account the property's condition and amenities.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord's proposed rent increase was dismissed as it did not adequately reflect the reasonable market value of comparable properties in the area.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The market rent was set at £1,500 per month.
Who was involved?
A tenant and a landlord were involved in the dispute over the rental price of an assured property.
How did the court decide, and why?
The tribunal reviewed comparable properties and adjusted for disrepair issues to determine the market rent.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Housing Act 1988 sections 13 and 14 were applied in determining the market rent.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The condition of the property and comparable rental values influenced the decision.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was partially for the tenant, as it did not increase the rent to £1,600 pcm.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone facing a market rent determination should consider comparable rental values and property conditions.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence on property condition and comparable rental prices was crucial.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
A party can appeal the decision to the Upper Tribunal if there is a point of law at issue.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It's advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.
