First-tier Tribunal Determines Rent for Assured Tenancy
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided on a rent increase for an assured periodic tenancy. They considered the a person's condition and market comparables, adjusting the rent downward due to necessary repairs and amenities.
⚖️ Legal holding
The First-tier Tribunal determines the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988, considering the property's condition and market comparables.
📖 What the law says
Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable. The tribunal will then determine a fair rent based on what a willing landlord would charge for a similar property in the open market. This determination considers the property's condition and market comparables, excluding factors like improvements made by the tenant or reductions due to the tenant's non-compliance.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal reviewed a rent increase request and determined a new rent based on the property's condition and location, reducing the proposed rent due to substandard conditions.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal reviewed a notice of rent increase for an assured periodic tenancy and determined a new rent based on market conditions and the property's state of repair, reducing the proposed rent due to property deficiencies.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – [NAME] Chamber File Ref No. LON/00AH/MNR/2019/0143
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 161 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
[NAME] Mr [RESPONDENT] [COMPANY] 74 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tenant Ms [APPELLANT]
1. The rent is: £ 910.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 05 March 2020
3. The amount included for services is not applicable N/A Per
4. Service charges are variable and are not included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 19th May 2010
6. Length of the term or rental period Monthly Periodic
7. Allocation of liability for repairs As Per Tenancy Agreement
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None.
9. Description of premises Inter war terraced house, accommodation on 2 levels. FF: 3 bedrooms and bathroom, GF: 2 rooms and kitchen, full gas fired central heating and double glazing
[NAME] of Decision 5th March 2020
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2013
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] CHAMBER ([NAME]) Case Reference : LON/00AMNR/2019/0143 [NAME] : 161 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] (Tenant) Representative : None Respondent : [redacted] [COUNSEL] (Landlord) Representative : [RESPONDENT]. Type of Application : Section 13(4) Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Members : Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] and venue of Hearing : 21 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of Decision : 5 March 2020
REASONS FOR DECISION
Background
1 The First Tier Tribunal received an application on 26 November 2019 from the tenant of the house at 161 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE], regarding a notice of increase of rent, served by the landlord’ agent, [RESPONDENT]., under S.13 of the Housing Act 1988 (the Act).
2 The notice, dated 22 October 2019, proposed a new rent of £1,300 per calendar month (pcm), with effect from and including 1 December 2019. The passing rent was stated in the notice, to be £725 pcm.
2
3 The tenancy is an assured periodic monthly tenancy. A copy of a document headed ‘Assured Shorthold Tenancy Agreement’ was provided by the landlord’s agent, with their written representations, however it was shrunk to 25% of its normal size, rendering it illegible.
4 In their application to the Tribunal for a determination of the market rent, the tenant stated that the passing rent was £850 pcm and not £725 pcm.
Inspection
5 The Tribunal inspected the [NAME] on 21 February 2020. The tenant was present; the landlord or their representative, was not. It is a house located in a busy subsurban road with bus routes and stop nearby. The terrace of very similar houses in which the [NAME] is set faces a parade of shops (several closed) above which are flats. There are on-street parking restrictions.
6 Access to the front of the houses including the [NAME], is from a raised unsurfaced shared pedestrian path. There is no place for a vehicle to stop and load/unload outside the house or the terrace. There is no rear or side pedestrian or vehicle access to the terrace including to the [NAME].
7 The terrace was constructed in the inter-war period. Plain tiled double pitched roof and rendered block or brick walls to front and rear. The windows and doors are double glazed in plastic frames. There is a front garden, and a longer rear garden and hard surfaced area by the house. The [NAME] is mid-terrace.
8 Accommodation is on 2 levels. There are two main rooms and a separate kitchen on the ground floor, all in basic condition. The first floor has two doubles and a single bedroom with a bathroom, also in basic condition.
9 The house has full gas fired central heating basement consists of two rooms and single storey back addition dining room and former kitchen. The electrical system is very basic and limited in distribution of lighting and particularly of power outlets. It is manifestly in an unsafe condition. In particular the old style wire-in fuseboard located under the staircase has no cover. There is therefore easy access to a range of live circuit wires from the electrical head with no fuse protection. There is a very real danger of death if contact was made with these wires by a child or adult. Maintenance of a safe electrical system, rests with the landlord.
10 There is no carpet or poor quality landlord’s carpet to many of the rooms. All white goods in the kitchen are the tenants. There is water damage to the ceiling of the main front bedroom which has penetrated
3 the floor into the ceiling of the front living room on the ground floor. It appears to be from a defect to the small flat roof over the front bay.
11 The [NAME] is in fair decorative condition inside, but poor to the outside.
Evidence
12 Directions, dated 4 December 2019, for the progression of the case, were issued. Neither party requested a hearing. The tenant made brief representations with the application. The landlord’s agent provide a short witness statement setting out the background to ownership and the tenancy. The statement explains that the most recent AST was dated 19 May 2010 at a rent of £725 (the illegible document referred to earlier). The statement confirms that the rent was increased to £850 pcm by agreement with the tenant. The statement was accompanied by copies of local houses to rent ranging from £1,400 to £2,200. The statement confirmed that the landlord would be content with £1,300 pcm because the [NAME] had has not undergone refurbishment for some time. The Tribunal carefully considered such written representations as it received, from both parties.
Law
13 In accordance with the terms of S14 of the Act we are required to determine the rent at which we consider the [NAME] 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 [NAME] falls to be valued as it stands; but assuming that the [NAME] to be in a reasonable internal decorative condition.
Decision
14 Based on the Tribunal’s own general knowledge of market rent levels in Croydon, we determine that the subject [NAME] would let on normal Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST) terms, for £1,300 pcm, fully fitted and in good order. However the [NAME] is in a busy suburban location, yet lacks easy access on foot or by vehicle. Whilst these might be less important for a flat for one or two adults, they are significant for what would typically be let as a family home.
15 There were no significant tenants improvements or additions to consider, but the Tribunal notes the absence of landlord’s ‘white goods’, flooring and curtains. The condition of the [NAME] where it falls to the landlord to effect repairs, is poor, in particular a roof leak which has damaged even the ground floor accommodation. The wiring circuitry is old and limited nature and in particular is currently in a dangerous
4 condition. These factors would be quite off putting to a prospective tenant. For all of these we accordingly deduct 30%, and thus determine the new rent on review, of £910 pcm. The new rent to take effect from the date set out in the landlord’s notice.
[NAME] 5 March 2020
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy Under Housing Act 1988
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Higher Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal sets rent for assured periodic tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) FTT Sets New Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Tenancy Based on Property Condition
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 tenant is entitled to a rent level that reflects the property's condition.
- The tenant is entitled to a rent adjustment based on the property's amenities.
- The tenant is entitled to a fair market rent adjustment.
- The tenant is entitled to a rent determination under the Housing Act 1988.
- The tenant is entitled to a rent level that reflects market comparables.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal decided on a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy, reducing the proposed rent due to property deficiencies.
Who was involved?
The case involved a tenant and a landlord's agent representing the landlord.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the property's condition and market comparables, adjusting the rent downward due to necessary repairs and amenities.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988 section 14 was applied to determine the rent.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the condition of the property and its comparability to the market rents.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant, reducing the proposed rent.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure that the property's condition and market comparables are considered when determining rent.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The inspection of the property and the written representations from both parties mattered.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Decisions from the First-tier Tribunal can 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.
