First-tier Tribunal Determines Rent for Assured Tenancy
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided on the rent for an assured periodic tenancy. They set the rent at £160 per week from June 3rd, 2022, based on what similar properties in Peterborough are renting for.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a rent level that reflects the open market value of the property under an assured tenancy.
📖 What the law says
This section applies to certain types of assured periodic tenancies, allowing landlords to serve a notice proposing an increase in rent. The notice must specify a new rent to take effect at the start of a new period of the tenancy, which must begin at least two months after the notice is served.
A tenant under an assured tenancy can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the rent at which the property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under similar conditions.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined the rent level for an assured periodic tenancy based on market conditions in Peterborough.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal received an application regarding a notice of increase of rent served by the landlord under S.13 of the Housing Act 1988. The Tribunal determined that the new rent of £160 per week from and including 3 June 2022 was appropriate based on market conditions in Peterborough.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : CAM/00JA/MNR/2022/0047 Property : 14 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] Representative : None Respondent : [redacted] Representative : None Type of Application : Section 13(4) Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Member : Mr N [NAME] and venue of Hearing :
24 October 2022
First Tier Tribunal (Eastern) HMCTS Cambridge [POSTCODE]
Date of Decision : 24 October 2022
REASONS FOR DECISION
Background
1 The First Tier Tribunal received an application dated 8 August 2022 from the tenant of the Property, regarding a notice of increase of rent, served by the landlord under S.13 of the Housing Act 1988 (the Act).
2 The notice, dated 29 April 2022, proposed a new rent of £160 per week exclusive, with effect from and including 3 June 2022. This rent would not include other services.
3 The tenancy is an assured periodic monthly tenancy with effect from and including 8 June 2018. The rent payable up to and including 2 June 2022 was £145 per week exclusive.
Inspection
4 The Tribunal did not inspect the Property owing to current Covid 19 restrictions and precautions it has adopted.
5 The house dates from the 2000’s on a small modern residential estate. From Google Streetview (@ June 2022) the Tribunal could see an external elevation only. The estate roads are private, so there is no clear view otherwise. The flat block is on the ground floor within a two storey block with flats to ground and first floor. It has brick elevations and single lap concrete tile on a double pitched roof. There is on and off road parking and garden and hard standing areas. Windows appeared to be double glazed frames.
6 The Property was said to have full central hearing and to be in fair condition with landlord’s carpets and curtains. The Property did include white goods other than a built-in cooker.
Evidence and Hearing
7 Directions, dated 27 July 2022, for the progression of the case, were issued by Legal [APPELLANT] [NAME]. The tenant requested a telephone hearing. The tenant completed the standard questionnaire providing background information on the tenancy and the Property. The landlord’s agent made representations in a letter dated 21 September 2022 prior to the hearing. The landlord and the tenant attended a telephone hearing on 24 October 2022.
Law
8 In accordance with the terms of S14 of the Act we are required to determine the rent at which we consider the property might reasonably be expected to let in the open market, by a willing landlord, under an assured tenancy, on the same terms as the actual tenancy; ignoring any increase in value attributable to tenant’s improvements and any decrease in value due to the tenant’s failure to comply with any terms of the tenancy. Thus the Property falls to be valued as it stands; but
assuming that the Property to be in a reasonable internal decorative condition. The minor defects and absence of landlord’s carpets and curtains were taken into account.
Decision
9 From the Tribunal’s own general knowledge of market rent levels in Peterborough it determines that the subject property would let on normal Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST) terms, for £160 per week fully fitted and in good order. Although minor defects have been reported at the Property these were not in evidence at the valuation date of 3 June 2022. It thus determines the new rent of £160 per week from and including 3 June 2022.
Chairman N [NAME] 24 October 2022
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. CAM/ooJA/MNR/2022/0047
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 14 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
[NAME]
Landlord [APPELLANT] [NAME]
Tenant [APPELLANT] [NAME]
1. The rent is: £ 160 Per week (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 3 June 2022
*3. The amount included for services is/is
negligible/not applicable nil Per
*4. Service charges are variable and are not included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 8 June 2018
6. Length of the term or rental period 6 months, then periodic
7. Allocation of liability for repairs Per tenancy
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Carpets and curtains and white goods including a cooker.
9. Description of premises 2008, 3 room kitchen bathroom/wc flat, brick walls, single lap tiled double pitched roof, off street parking, communal yard/ gardens. Double glazing, full gas fired central heating. Minor defects to interior.
[NAME] of Decision 24 October 2022
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent at £1000 pcm for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy in Luton
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy - First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy Set by First-tier Tribunal
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Fair Rent for Norwich Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Reduces Proposed Rent Increase for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Bracknell Flat
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Northampton Property at £1000 pcm
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent for Property Based on Market Conditions
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Due to Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Property
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 tribunal determined the rent based on its general knowledge of market rent levels in the area.
- The property was valued as if it were fully fitted and in good order.
- Minor defects reported at the property were not considered as they were not in evidence at the valuation date.
- The new rent was set at £160 per week, effective from 3 June 2022.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal set the new rent at £160 per week from June 3rd, 2022.
Who was involved?
The tenant applied for a review of the rent increase notice served by the landlord.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the market rent levels in Peterborough, taking into account the condition of the property and the terms of the tenancy.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988 sections 13 and 14 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the comparison of the property's rent to market conditions in Peterborough.
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 should consider the market rent levels in their area when disputing a rent increase.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The standard questionnaire provided by the tenant and the representations made by the landlord's agent were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions from the First-tier Tribunal can often be appealed to the Upper Tribunal.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.
