VadeLab
Allowed in PartFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Determines Market Rent for Birmingham Property

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on the fair market rent for a property in Cotteridge based on evidence from both parties about similar rental prices and the state of repair of the property. The final rent is set at £720 per month, effective from June 16th.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord must determine a fair market rent based on comparable properties and the current state of repair and condition of the property.

Topics

tenancyrent determination

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

This section allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine a fair market rent based on comparable properties and the condition of the accommodation.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the market rent for a property in Cotteridge, Birmingham, considering evidence of comparable properties and the condition of the accommodation.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal determined the market rent for a property in Cotteridge, considering comparable properties and the condition of accommodation. The rent was set at £720 per calendar month.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed in Part

© CROWN COPYRIGHT Case Reference : BIR/00CN/MNR/2026/0126 Property : [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Tenant : [NAME] Landlord : [APPELLANT] Landlord’s agent : Date of application : 9th May 2026 Type of Application : Determination of a Market Rent Sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Members : [NAME] [NAME] of Decision : 16th June 2026 _______________________________________________

DECISION The Tribunal determines a rent of £720 (Seven Hundred and Twenty Pounds) per calendar month with effect from 16th June 2026 ____________________________________ FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

REASONS FOR THE

DECISION Background 1. On 1st April 2026 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £750 per calendar month in place of the existing rent of £490 pcm to take effect from 10th May 2026.

2. On 9th May 2026, under Section 13(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988, the Tenant referred the Landlord’s notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal for determination of a market rent. Inspection 3. The Tribunal did not inspect the property but considered this case on the basis of the papers provided by the parties and having regard to its own knowledge, expertise and online research. Evidence 4. The Tribunal considered the written submissions provided by the Tenant and the Landlord. From the brief information provided it appears that the subject property is a first floor apartment with accommodation comprising entrance hallway, living room, kitchenette, bedroom, and bathroom together with shared lower ground floor washer and dryer facilities the property forming part of a 3- storey detached Victorian residence situated in the South Birmingham suburb of Cotteridge which in turn is located approximately 4 miles south of Birmingham city centre.

5. The property is let on an Assured Shorthold Tenancy incorporating standard repairing obligations.

6. The Tenant submitted details including photographic evidence of what they consider to be repairs required to the property also identifying the “dated” nature of the accommodation.

7. The Tenant further submitted to the Tribunal details of comparable properties and letting information of similar properties in the locality of between £425 and £625 per calendar month.

8. The Landlord submitted that the average rent for a 1 bed apartment within a 1.45-mile radius of the property was £789 per calendar month and that flats achieving below £750 per calendar month were units above shops or micro flats. In addition, the Landlord accepted the dated condition of the property but suggested that if it were refurbished to a higher standard it would comfortably achieve £900 per calendar month.

3 9. The Landlord, submitted to the Tribunal details of what they considered to be comparable properties offered to let in the locality ranging from £550 per calendar month to £1200 per calendar month. Determination and Valuation 10. Having considered the comparable evidence provided by the Landlord and Tenant together with our own expert knowledge of rental values in the area, we consider that the open market rent for the property in its current state of repair and condition to be fairly represented by the sum of £720 per calendar month. Decision 11. The Tribunal therefore determined that the rent at which the subject property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing Landlord under an assured tenancy was £720 per calendar month with effect from 10th May 2026. Hardship 12. The Tenant raises hardship in their submissions.

Accordingly, the Tribunal directs the new rent of £720 per calendar month to take effect from 16th June 2026 this being the date of the Tribunal. Chairman: Date: 16th June 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.

4 Notice of the Tribunal Decision and Register of Rents under Assured Periodic Tenancies (Section 14 Determination) Housing Act 1988 Section 14 Address of Premises The Tribunal members were [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] [NAME] [NAME] Landlord [RESPONDENT] House, [ADDRESS], Edgbaston, Birmingham. [POSTCODE] Tenant [NAME] O’ [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £720 Per calendar month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 16th June 2026 3. The amount included for services is not applicable Per 4. Date assured tenancy commenced 10 October 2017 5. Length of the term or rental period monthly 6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None 8. Description of premises One bedroom apartment. Chairman Date of Decision 16th June 2026 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. BIR/00CN/MNR/2026/0126

📊 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

  • Rent should be set based on comparable properties and local conditions.
  • Adjustments to rent can be made due to property defects affecting habitability.
  • Proposed rent increases must be reasonable and supported by evidence of similar properties' rents.
  • Rent determination must consider the current state of repair and condition of the property.
  • Tenants are entitled to have their rent set at a fair market value by a First-tier Tribunal.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal determined a fair market rent for the property in Cotteridge.

Who was involved?

A tenant and a landlord were involved, with both providing evidence on comparable rental prices.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court considered evidence from both parties about similar properties and the condition of the property to determine the fair market rent.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988 were applied in this case.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The evidence on comparable rental prices and the condition of the property was crucial to determining the fair market rent.

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

The decision was partially in favour of the tenant, as the rent set was lower than what the landlord proposed.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should gather evidence on comparable rental prices and property condition to support their argument.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Photographic evidence of repairs needed, details of comparable properties, and letting information were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, either party can appeal the decision on a point of law within 28 days.

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

It is advisable to seek legal 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.