First-tier Tribunal Determines Market Rent for Rochdale Property

OUTCOME: Allowed

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : MAN/00BQ/MNR/2025/1029

Property : [ADDRESS], Rochdale, OL11 IEL

Applicant: [redacted]

Respondent: [redacted] Section 14, Housing Act 1988 – Market Rent Determination

Tribunal Members : Judge J [NAME], FRICS, Valuer Member

Date of Decision : 23rd February 2026

DECISION

1. The rent is £875.00 per calendar month. The new rent takes effect from 1st December 2025.

REASONS

Preliminary Matters 1. In accordance with the ‘Practice Direction from the Senior President of Tribunals: Reasons for decisions’, this decision refers only to the main issues and evidence in dispute, and how those issues essential to the Tribunal’s conclusions have been resolved.

Inspection and form of determination 2. The property was inspected on 23rd February 2026.

3. The Applicant was present at the inspection.

4. Neither party requested a hearing and the application was determined on the basis of the papers submitted by the parties in advance of the inspection, and the inspection.

The Law 5. The Tribunal considered and applied section 14 of the Housing Act 1988 (HA 1988).

Background to the application 6. The property ([ADDRESS], Rochdale OL11 IEL) is subject to an assured shorthold tenancy which commenced on 1st July 2021, for a fixed term of 6 months. here followed a further fixed term tenancy for a period of 6 months from 1st July 2024. The current statutory periodic tenancy arose on 1st January 2024.

7. This application (dated 17th November 2025) arises in consequence of service of a section 13 HA 1988 notice by the Respondent dated 28th October 2025. The notice proposed a new rent of £1200.00 per calendar month, to take effect from 1st December 2025, in place of the (then) current rent of £700.00 per calendar month.

Issues 8. The following issues were identified for determination by the Tribunal: a. The market rent for the property which could be achieved if it were in good letting order; b. Whether there were any matters which made it appropriate to reduce the market rent, and, if so; c. The amount of any deductions from the market rent; d. The rent to be applied to the property in the light of any deductions; e. The commencement date for the rent, including potential undue hardship to the tenant.

Relevant Evidence and the Tribunal’s Conclusions on the Issues Description

9. The property is a flush-faced, pavement fronted mid terraced house built around 1900 of brick and slate construction. There are two reception rooms on the ground floor and a galley kitchen. There are two double bedrooms on the first floor and a bathroom with a bath, w.c. and wash basin. A narrow winding staircase leads to an attic room. There is a basement room roughly finished but providing storage space. The basement can be accessed internally or via a separate external door. There is a small rear yard. The rear elevation is

rendered. All windows are UPVC double-glazed and the property has gas central heating with radiators in all rooms except the basement.

Inspection

10. Overall, the property is in reasonable condition, but the kitchen requires refurbishment with the floor covering being particularly poor and unhygienic. Similarly, the bathroom would probably require to be refurbished if the house was to be re-let. The decorative condition was fair, but with some cracking in places on the plasterwork and damp staining from an old leak in the front sitting room. The attic room had signs of damp penetration and mould. The ceiling in the attic is pitched, sitting just under the roof and it is unclear how effectively this is insulated. An old stairlift has been left in place on the main staircase and it impedes access to the first floor. In its present condition the attic room could not be used as a bedroom. The stairs to the attic room are sound but winding and have narrow treads. There is no handrail which means great care is required to use them. Either one or both gas fires do not work (there is a dispute of fact, the landlord says one, the tenant says two).

Market Rental Evidence

11. The Respondent provided no specific evidence of properties in the locality, but in written submissions dated 28th October 2025 provided by his representative (at that time) it was stated that “Similar 3 bed houses in Rochdale are currently advertised at rent between £1000 and £1350 per calendar month”, and in a subsequent submission by separate representative, dated 10th February 2026, it was suggested that “the current market rents of similar properties in the locale of similar sizes are currently being advertised at £1650 p.c.m.”. No comparable rental evidence was provided by the Applicant.

12. The Tribunal identified comparable 2- and 3-bedroom properties in the locality with asking rents of between £850 and 950 p.c.m. (one 3-bedroom property was advertised at £1200 p.c.m. but the property was garden-fronted, and Tribunal was not satisfied it was a properly comparable property).

Conclusion

13. In good decorative order and good condition, the Tribunal found the market rent would be £1000.00 p.c.m. (taking into account the generous size of the property). However, the property is some way from good decorative order and good condition and warrants an adjustment for neglect/repair and required improvement (inoperative gas fire(s), kitchen and bathroom refurbishment, poor kitchen floor, patches of damp/mould evident, particularly in the attic

room, no handrail to attic, old stairlift in situ on main staircase, hampering access to first floor, old damp staining to front lounge ceiling) and a deduction of £125 p.c.m. was therefore considered appropriate.

14. The rent payable for the property as inspected by the Tribunal is therefore £875.00 per calendar month.

15. The Applicant did not submit any written evidence in relation to undue hardship, and accordingly the effective date for the new rent is 1st December 2025. .