First-tier Tribunal Determines Reduced Market Rent for Poorly Maintained Property
📌 In brief
In a recent tenancy dispute, the First-tier Tribunal decided on a market rent of £1,725 for a poorly maintained property. The decision took into account the property's condition and compared it to similar properties.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a reduced market rent if the property is in poor condition.
📖 What the law says
Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant with an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under their tenancy. The tribunal will then determine a fair open-market rent based on the condition of the property and similar properties, considering factors such as the property's condition and comparable rental rates.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined a market rent for a poorly maintained property.
📜 Headnote Official document
In a tenancy dispute, the First-tier Tribunal determined a market rent of £1,725 for a poorly maintained property, taking into account its condition and comparable properties.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. GB/LON/00BK/MNR/2024/0115
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]
Judge Prof R Percival Mrs A Flynn [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tenant [NAME] & [NAME] [NAME]
1. The rent is: £ 1,725 Per Calendar month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 30 August 2024
*3. The amount included for services is/is
negligible/not applicable
Per
*4. Service charges are variable and are not included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 26 July 2020
6. Length of the term or rental period Periodic
7. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, s. 11
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord N/A
9. Description of premises Flat in a converted Victorian or Edwardian house
Chairman Judge Prof R Percival Date of Decision 30 August 2024
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00BK/MNR/2024/0115 Property : [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Tenants : [NAME] and [NAME] [NAME] Landlord : [RESPONDENT] of objection : 28 February 2024 Type of application : Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988 Tribunal members : Judge Prof R Percival Mrs A Flynn MA, MRICS Venue and Date of hearing : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] 30 August 2024 Date of summary reasons : 30 August 2024
DECISION
The Tribunal determines a rent of £1,725 per calendar month with effect from 30 August 2024
2 SUMMARY REASONS
Background 1. On 29 January 2024 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £ 1800 per calendar month in place of the existing rent of £1463.68 to take effect from 1 March 2024.
2. By an application under Section 13(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988, received in the Tribunal on 28 February 2024, the Tenants referred the Landlord’s notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal for determination of a market rent. Inspection 3. The Tribunal has carried out an inspection of the property on 30 August 2024. The Evidence 4. The Tribunal has considered the written submissions of both parties, including the properties submitted as comparable by the Landlord.
5. We considered that it was not appropriate to determine a starting-point market rent for a property in normal marketable condition, and then make specific reductions. Rather, we have had regard to the general condition of the property, and determined what we think would have been the correct market value in that condition. In particular, that means we are determining the market rent for a property with poor decoration throughout, tired and out-dated fixtures, tiles etc, windows in poor conditions, including secondary glazing rather than double glazing (except one window), hair line cracks, and stains from previous damp. As a result, we considered the market rent in its current condition would be £1,725. As a check, we considered that in good, refurbished condition, the property would realise £2,300, and that a 25% reduction to reflect its current state is appropriate.
6. We heard evidence from the Ms [NAME] that the increase in rent would cause her and her joint tenant considerable hardship, in the light of their limited income, and the current state of inflation. We accept this evidence, and consider that timing the increase from the date in the section 13 notice would cause them undue hardship. We conclude that the new rent should take effect from today’s date.
3
Decisions 7. 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 £1,725.
8. The Tribunal directs the new rent to take effect on the date of this decision. Appeal Provisions 9. These summary reasons are provided to give the parties an indication as to how the Tribunal made its decision. If either party wishes to appeal this decision, they should first make a request for full reasons and the details of how to appeal will be set out in the full reasons. Any subsequent application for permission to appeal should be made on Form RP PTA.
Name: Judge Professor R Percival Date: 30 August 2024
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Reduces Market Rent Due to Poor Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Market Rent for Tenancy Agreement
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Fair Market Rent for Tenancy Dispute
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Market Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Market Rent Determination for Split-Level Flat in London
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment for Property Condition - First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy
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 property is in poor condition.
- The rent should be adjusted based on the property's condition.
- The rent must reflect the fair market value considering the property's state.
- Rent adjustments are based on local rental values and property conditions.
- Tenants are entitled to a fair rent determination under relevant housing acts.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal determined a market rent of £1,725 for a poorly maintained property.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved in the dispute.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court inspected the property and considered its condition, determining that a market rent of £1,725 was appropriate.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988, section 14 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that the property was in poor condition and needed a reduced market rent was crucial.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was in favour of the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may also be entitled to a reduced market rent if their property is in poor condition.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence of the property's condition and comparable properties were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions like this can be appealed to a higher court.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.
