First-tier Tribunal Determines Rent Increase for Assured Tenancy
📌 In brief
The Tribunal decided on a rent increase for an assured periodic tenancy, considering the property's condition and market comparables. The rent was set at £1700 per month.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord may seek to increase the rent of an assured periodic tenancy based on 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 determine the rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market. The determination considers the property's condition and comparable evidence.
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, section 11 implies a covenant by the landlord to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the dwelling house, including drains, gutters, and external pipes. It also includes the installations for water, gas, electricity, sanitation, space heating, and heating water. However, the landlord is not required to carry out repairs unless they affect the tenant's enjoyment of the dwelling house.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on the property's condition and comparable evidence.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on the property's condition and comparable evidence, reducing the proposed rent from £2000 to £1700 per month.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00AH/MNR/2023/0069
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 78 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
[NAME]
Landlord Mr [RESPONDENT] [NAME] and Mrs [RESPONDENT] c/o [COMPANY] 27 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tenant Mr [APPELLANT]
1. The rent is: £ 1700 Per Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 1st March 2023
*3. The amount included for services is not applicable
Per
*4. Service charges are not included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 1st June 2015
6. Length of the term or rental period 25 Months
7. Allocation of liability for repairs In accordance with agreement
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None
9. Description of premises A mid terrace house with three bedrooms, two reception rooms, kitchen, bathroom, lavatory, rear garden, dilapidated garage.
[NAME] of Decision 5TH June 2023
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00AH/MNR/2023/0069 Property : [ADDRESS], Addiscombe, Croydon, CRO 7AP Applicant (Landlord) : Mr [COUNSEL] [NAME] & Mrs [COUNSEL] : [COUNSEL] [COMPANY] Respondent (Tenant) : Mr [COUNSEL] : None Type of [NAME] : Section 70 of the Rent ACT 1977 Tribunal members : Mr [NAME] : Paper determination Date of Reasons : 3rd July 2023
DECISION
2
Decision of the tribunal (1) The Tribunal determines that the rent that the property in its current condition as at the 1st March 2023, being the starting date for the new rent, might reasonably be expected to achieve in the open market under an assured tenancy is £1700 per month Background 1. The tenants have lived in the property as assured periodic tenants since 11th June 2015 with an agreement of that date.
2. On the 23rd January 2023 the landlord’s solicitors [RESPONDENT] served a notice pursuant to section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 seeking to increase the rent from £1,200 to £2,000 per month, being an increase of £800 effective from 14th April 2023.
3. By an [NAME] dated 28th March 2023, the tenant referred that notice to the Tribunal for a determination of the market rent. The Tribunal issued Directions for the conduct of the matter on 11th April 2023. Subsequently, the tenant requested an extension of time in order to comply with the Directions. This request was refused.
4. The Tribunal considered the matter suitable for a determination on the papers and therefore a hearing was not necessary. The parties did not disagree with this arrangement. The Evidence 5. The parties prepared a helpful bundle of evidence which includes a background to the case, the two applications, the directions, the tenancy agreement, completed rent appeal statements. A schedule of photographs and a list of Rightmove comparable evidence and more about this is stated below. Inspection 6. The Tribunal did not inspect the property and relied on the information provided by the parties, Rightmove, [ADDRESS] and its expert knowledge. The property is an ex local authority mid terrace house built during the 1950s and is in a busy road convenient to local amenities.
3 7. The accommodation comprises three bedrooms, living room, dining room kitchen and bathroom. There is central heating. There is a rear garden and dilapidated garage. The property has an EPC Rating of D63 and is stated to be 118m2. The Law 8.. The rules governing a determination are set out in section 14 of the Housing Act 1988. In particular, the Tribunal is to determine the rent at which the property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy, subject to disregards in relation to the nature of the tenancy (i.e. it being granted to a “sitting tenant”) and any increase or reduction in the value due to the tenant’s improvements or failure to comply with the terms of the tenancy. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the Tribunal has proceeded on the basis that the landlord is responsible for repairs to the structure, exterior and any installations pursuant to section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the tenant for interior decoration.
The valuation 9. Having carefully considered all the evidence the Tribunal considers that the rent that would be achieved in its current condition with reasonably modern kitchen and bathroom fittings, modern services and central heating, white goods supplied by the landlord would be £2000 per month. This valuation is based upon the comparable evidence supplied in the documents. The Tribunal has also utilized its own professional judgement and experience rather than specific market transactions. 10 We now need to adjust this rental figure in order to take account of its current condition. In order to determine this, the Tribunal found the photographic evidence very helpful. Using its own expertise, we consider that a deduction of 15% (£300) should be applied to take into consideration the damp and mould issues, collapsed fence panels, overgrown leaning trees and dilapidated garage. This reduces the rental figure to £1,700 per month. 10 The average rate for rental properties in the Croydon area has gone up every quarter since the end of 2019, according to the online property portal Rightmove. The rent increases are due to not enough properties coming to the market to meet demand and the number of homes for rent is 46 per cent below 2019 levels. This puts this decision in context with the current rental market.
4
11. The Tribunal has been provided with a copy of the tenancy agreement, which incorporates the usual repair obligations. 12. The Tribunal received no evidence of hardship and, therefore, the rent determined by the tribunal is to take effect from 1st March 2023.
[NAME] 3rd July 2023
Rights of appeal
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 may 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 the 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.
5 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:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins: Invalid Rent Increase Notice Due to Incorrect Form Usage
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Challenge Against Invalid Rent Increase Notice
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy Adjusted Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Tenancy Based on Market Value
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Urgent Repairs Dispensation to Prevent Flooding
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation Order for Fire Alarm System Install…
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's current condition, including damp, mould, and a dilapidated garage, justified a rent reduction.
- The Tribunal used its professional judgment and experience to determine the market rent.
- Comparable evidence from documents supported the valuation of the property.
- The average rental rates in the Croydon area have increased due to high demand and low property availability.
- The Tribunal determined the market rent for the property in its current condition to be £1700 per month.
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 rent increase for an assured periodic tenancy, setting the rent at £1700 per month.
Who was involved?
The landlord sought to increase the rent for an assured periodic tenancy held by the tenant.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the property's condition and market comparables, reducing the proposed rent from £2000 to £1700 per month.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988 and the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the condition of the property and the comparable evidence of similar properties.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the landlord, allowing the rent increase to £1700 per month.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should consider the condition of their property and market comparables when seeking a rent increase.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Photographic evidence of the property's condition and comparable evidence of similar properties mattered.
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 get a solicitor for a case like this to ensure proper representation.
