VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Determines Market Rent for Property

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on the market rent for a property without holding a hearing. They set the rent at £2,400.00 per month based on written submissions from both the tenant and landlord.

⚖️ Legal holding

The market rental value of a property is determined by considering its age, location, and state of repair among other factors.

Topics

tenancy disputesmarket rent 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 the open-market rent, considering various factors including the periods of the tenancy and the terms of the agreement.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the market rent for a property based on written submissions without a hearing.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined the market rent for a property at £2,400.00 per month based on written submissions without holding a hearing. The decision considered the property's age, location, and state of repair.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. GB/LON/00AZ/MNR/2024/0620

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 10 PRAGNELL ROAD LEE LONDON [POSTCODE]

[NAME]

[RESPONDENT] [NAME]

[APPELLANT] [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 2,400.00 Per month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 11th August 2024

*3. The amount included for services is/is

negligible/not applicable N/A Per

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included

Chairman [NAME] of Decision 11TH August 2025

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 11 NOVEMBER 2021

6. Length of the term or rental period MONTHLY

7. Allocation of liability for repairs [RESPONDENT]

8. Furniture provided by [RESPONDENT] or superior [RESPONDENT]

9. Description of premises A 3 BEDROOMED SEMI DETACHED HOUSE

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Case Reference : GB/LON/OOAZ/MNR/2024/0620

Hearing Type : By way of Written Representation

Property : 10 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Applicant: [redacted]

Respondent: [redacted] : 8 August 2024

Type of [NAME] : Referral in Respect of Market Rent Under Section 13 of the Housing Act 1988

Tribunal Members : [NAME]

Date of Full Reasons : 18 August 2025

STATEMENT OF FULL REASONS ON AN [NAME] FOR DETERMINATION OF A MARKET RENT UNDER S. 13 AND 14 OF THE HOUSING ACT 1988.

2

REASONS

Background

1. On 28 June 2024 the [RESPONDENT] served a Notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 proposing an increase in the rent of the above property from the passing rent of £2,100.00 per month to £3,100.00 per month.

2. On 8 August 2024 the [APPELLANT] made an [NAME] to the Tribunal for the determination of a market rent.

3. The original tenancy is believed to have begun on 11 November 2021.

4. The [APPELLANT] occupies the property by way of an Assured Periodic Tenancy.

5. By way of a letter dated 30 October 2024, the Tribunal issued initial Directions. These required the [RESPONDENT] to provide details of evidence on which they wished to rely by way of reply by 20 November 2024. The [APPELLANT] was directed to do the same by 4 December 2024 and the [RESPONDENT] was given until 11 December 2024 for his response thereto.

6. No submissions nor Reply form was received from the [RESPONDENT] but in passing correspondence the [APPELLANT] has made limited submissions.

7. In consideration of the Market rental value of the subject property, the Tribunal has taken into consideration all documentation before it, including letters and any reply forms returned by the parties.

8. By way of an email dated 5 December 2024, the [APPELLANT] initially stated that she is abroad and no longer living in the property having moved out in October 2024 and as a result she wished to withdraw her [NAME] . Additional correspondence passed between the [APPELLANT], and the Tribunal however on 30 June 2025 the [APPELLANT] confirmed that she did now, in fact, wish to have this matter dealt with as she is continuing to receive communication on the issue from the [RESPONDENT].

9. Finally, by way of an email dated 10 July 2025, the [APPELLANT] confirmed that she did not wish to withdraw and wished the matter to proceed.

10. The [RESPONDENT] made no submissions .

3

11. Within the [APPELLANT]’s [NAME], they state that they have replaced the bath panel, the oven door and a rear door lock but the [APPELLANT] makes no other submissions in relation to the property.

12. On 11 August 2025, on the basis of paper submissions and without a hearing, the Tribunal determined the Market rent of the above property at £2,400.00 per month.

Hardship

13. We have not received any submissions on hardship from the [APPELLANT].

Inspection

14. No inspection of the property has taken place.

The Law

15. When determining a market rent in accordance with the Housing Act 1988 Section 13 regard must be had to all of the circumstances (other than personal circumstances) including the age, location and state of repair of the property, matters contained within the rent, repairing obligations, etc. This means that issues such as the [APPELLANT]’s ability to pay the rent or bills associated with the property are not a consideration for the tribunal in assessing the rent.

Valuation

16. Following consideration of the written and photographic submissions given by both parties and using its own knowledge and experience of the rental market in the Lee area, the Tribunal finds that the market rental value of the property would be £2,400.00 per month.

17. Taking into account the evidence that has been provided to the tribunal , the Tribunal considers that it is not necessary to adjust that market rental value.

4

Valuation Calculation

18. Open market rent £2,400.00 per month

Deduction for adjustments detailed above 0% = £0.00 per month

19. The Tribunal therefore determines that the market rental value of the property should be set at a figure of £2,400.00 per month.

Chairman:

[NAME]

Date:

18 August 2025

5

ANNEX OF RIGHTS FOR MARKET RENTS

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 might have.

If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), then a written [NAME] for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with this case

The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office within 28 days after the Tribunal sends written reasons for the Decision to the [NAME].

If the [NAME] is not made within the 28 day time limit, such [NAME] 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 [NAME] for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit.

The [NAME] 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 [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking. Any appeal in respect of the Housing Act 1988 should be on a point of law.

If the Tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further [NAME] for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).

📊 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 landlord considers the tenant’s improvements when setting the market rent.
  • The rent is adjusted based on the property's condition and lack of modernisation.
  • The rent is set according to the fair market value as determined by a tribunal.
  • The rent is adjusted to reflect the property's condition and location.
  • The rent is determined under section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The market rent for a property was set at £2,400.00 per month.

Who was involved?

The tenant and landlord were involved in the dispute.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on written submissions from both parties without holding a hearing.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 sections 13 and 14 were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The arguments regarding the property's age, location, and state of repair were crucial.

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

The decision was for the tenant, setting a lower rent than proposed by the landlord.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation might benefit from submitting comprehensive evidence to support their case.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Letters and reply forms submitted by both parties were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).

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

It is recommended to seek 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.