VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Determines Short-term Tenancy Rent at £1,500

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on the rent for a short-term tenancy at £1,500 per month, taking into account the property's size, location, and market conditions. This decision was made under the Housing Act 1988, Section 14.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a rent assessment that reflects the open market value of the property, adjusted for the length of the tenancy.

Topics

rent determinationshort-term tenancy

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, Section 14, 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 based on what a willing landlord would charge in the open market for a similar tenancy.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the rent for a short-term tenancy at £1,500 per month, considering the property's size, location, and market conditions.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined the rent for a short-term tenancy at £1,500 per month, considering the property's size, location, and market conditions. The decision was based on the Housing Act 1988, Section 14.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. BIR/00GA/MNR/2020/0033

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 10 [NAME], Whitchurch, Ross- on-wye, Herefordshire, [POSTCODE]

[NAME]

Landlord S [RESPONDENT] 2 Grey Ladies Oast, [ADDRESS], Crouch, [ADDRESS], Sevenoaks,kent, [POSTCODE]

Tenant Mr [NAME] & Ms [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £1500.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 9th July 2020

3. The amount included for services is not applicable N/A Per N/A

4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 9th November 2019

6. Length of the term or rental period 6 Months

7. Allocation of liability for repairs S.11

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Part furnished

9. Description of premises Modern five bedroom detached house

[NAME] of Decision 31st July 2020

1

Case Reference : BIR/00GA/MNR/2020/0033

Property

: 10 [NAME], Whitchurch, Ross-on-Wye, Herefordshire,

[POSTCODE]

Applicants

: [redacted]

Respondent: [redacted] : Appeal against a notice proposing a new rent under an

Assured Periodic Tenancy under section 13(4) of the Housing

Act 1988

Tribunal Members : Mr [NAME].[NAME]. [NAME] B.Sc.(Est.Man.) FRICS

Date and Venue of : Not Applicable, paper determination Hearing

Date of Decision : 7th August 2020

____________________________________________________________

DECISION

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2020

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

1 The rent is determined at £1,500 (One Thousand Five Hundred Pounds) per calendar month from 9th July 2020.

REASONS

Introduction

2 The tenants, [NAME] and [NAME], hold a monthly periodic assured shorthold tenancy of 10 [NAME], Whitchurch, Ross-on-Wye, Herefordshire [POSTCODE], by tenancy granted for a fixed term of six months from 9th November 2019.

3 By Notice dated 21st May 2020 the landlord, [RESPONDENT], served notice of increase under section 13(2) of The Housing Act 1988 proposing a rent of £1,850.00 per month to take effect on 9th July 2020. Neither the previous nor proposed rents included any sums for Council Tax, water rates or fixed service charges.

4 On 8th June 2020 the tenants requested the rent to be determined by the First-tier Tribunal Property Chamber.

5 The rent was determined by written representations on 31st July 2020.

6 On 6th August 2020 the Tribunal received a request for Reasons from the landlord.

The Law 7 Section 14 of The Housing Act 1988 states:

'(1) Where, under subsection (4)(a) of section 13 above, a tenant refers to a rent assessment committee a notice under subsection (2) of that section, the committee shall determine the rent at which, subject to subsections (2) and (4) below, the committee consider that the dwelling-house concerned might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy -

(a) which is a periodic tenancy having the same periods as those of the tenancy to

which the notice relates;

(b) which begins at the beginning of the new period specified in the notice;

(c) the terms of which (other than relating to the amount of the rent) are the same as

those of the tenancy to which the notice relates;...'

'(2) In making a determination under this section, there shall be disregarded -

(a) any effect on the rent attributable to the granting of a tenancy to a sitting tenant;

(b) any increase in the value of the dwelling-house attributable to a relevant

improvement carried out by a person who at the time it was carried out was the

tenant, if the improvement-

(i) was carried out otherwise than in pursuance of an obligation to the

immediate landlord ...

8 The jurisdiction of the Rent Assessment Committee was transferred to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) from 1st July 2013.

3

Facts Found 9 The property comprises a modern detached house built in or about 2003 on the fringe of Whitchurch, a village next to the A40 near Symonds Yat, about 7 miles south of Ross and 5 miles north of Monmouth.

10 The house is within a small estate development known as '[NAME]'.

11 It comprises a five bedroom detached family house with an entrance hall, three reception rooms, kitchen / breakfast room and w.c. on the ground floor, four bedrooms (one with en- suite) and family bathroom on the first floor and a fifth bedroom and bathroom in roof space on the second floor. There are gardens around the house, a drive and single detached garage although this is retained by the landlord and excluded from the tenancy. The landlord also retains use of a wardrobe in the main bedroom and cupboard on the second floor which are excluded from the tenancy. The property was let part furnished. The landlord provided 12 months' tv licence and broadband at no extra charge.

12 The landlord bought the house in September 2019 for her own use but wished to travel abroad over the winter and let it for 6 months by Assured Shorthold Tenancy to the present tenants. It was advertised on the open market at £1,400 per month on the 'Open Rent' website and according to the landlord there were six or seven potential applicants.

On return to the UK, the landlord served Notice to Quit but the tenants have not vacated and she proposed an increase to £1,850.00 per month from expiry of the initial six month period on 9th July 2020.

Submissions

13 Neither party requested a Hearing. The case has therefore been determined on the written representations of the parties.

14 The Applicant's Submission

The tenants gave a description of the property and history of the tenancy. They produced photographs and brief descriptions of the asking rents of 8 alternative properties taken from Rightmove to support their case:

Ref. Address

Asking Rent pcm £

[ADDRESS], Tutshill, Chepstow

4 bedroom detached modern estate house.

£1,200

2 'Dreamdon', [ADDRESS]., Bream

4 bedroom detached modern house.

£1,200

3 Bream, Lydney

4 bedroom detached.

£1,250

[ADDRESS]., Cinderford

4 bedroom detached.

£ 985

5 (Address not shown)

4 bedroom detached.

£ 1,100

6 Eaton Bishop

4 bedroom detached with double garage.

£ 950

4

[ADDRESS], Hereford

5 bedroom detached.

£1,500

8 [NAME], Walford, Ross

4 bedroom detached.

£1,400

The tenants have not formally put forward their own opinion of value.

15 The Respondents' Submission

The landlord responded by commenting on each aspect of the history and description of the accommodation and referred to the asking rents of 7 houses and brief descriptions in evidence.

1 Eastbach, English Bicknor

6 bedroom detached.

£2,500

2 Ross on Wye (Address not provided)

4 bedroom detached.

£1,650

3 The Malthouse, Skenfrith

4 bedroom detached.

£1,800

4 Birch Hollow, Tidenham

4 bedroom cottage.

£1,900

[ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], Gorsley

4 bedroom detached.

£1,950

6 Whitecliff, Coleford

4 bedroom detached.

£1,500

[ADDRESS], Frampton

5 bedroom detached

£2,000

Decision 16 There is nothing exactly similar to the subject property offered in evidence in the immediate area, i.e. a modern 5 bed detached house recently let in Whitchurch and consequently the Tribunal has taken account of the evidence provided and its own general experience of the rental market across the area.

17 Most of the houses quoted by the tenants are smaller and most provided by the landlord are larger. Some are individual and others estate. The subject house is in a small estate occupying an estate plot, there are no outstanding features around the site and the garage has been excluded.

18 There is also the unusual position that two cupboards in the house have been excluded from the tenancy.

19 Both parties refer to problems with the central heating in the past but they are assumed to have been resolved and while the house may not be in perfect condition, it is assumed to be in a reasonable condition for property of its age which is only 17 years old. The internal fittings will therefore be modern and from the particulars provided the accommodation is well planned.

5

20 The most significant value affecting point is that made by the landlord; 'This tenancy was always supposed to be a short 6/7 month let which was why the initial rent was so low'' because as can be seen from section 14(1)(a) of the Housing Act 1988 referred to above, the Tribunal is required to consider the same length of tenancy as the subject property, six months. In fact, this is even more relevant in this case because the current tenancy is for less than six months as the tenants have been given Notice to Quit.

21 Both parties suggest a short term tenancy would attract a discount and the Tribunal agrees.

22 The subject rent was market tested in November 2019 and the market rent on the terms of the tenancy was agreed at £1,400 per month. Neither party has provided any evidence to suggest that rents have increased or decreased since then but applying its own general knowledge and experience the Tribunal has found minor increases since last November.

23 The Tribunal therefore determines the rent at £1,500.00 (Fifteen Hundred Pounds) per month with effect from the date of increase, 9th July 2020.

[NAME] B.Sc.(Est.Man.) FRICS Chairman

Appeal

If either party is dissatisfied with this decision an application may be made to this Tribunal for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal, Property Chamber (Residential Property) on a point of law only. Any such application must be received within 28 days after the decision and accompanying reasons have been sent to the parties (Rule 52 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013).

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

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 rent is assessed based on the open market value of the property.
  • The assessment considers the condition and amenities of the property.
  • The rent reflects comparable rental values in the area.
  • The assessment takes into account the location of the property.
  • The rent is determined by a fair process, such as through a tribunal.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • (No factors identified that went against the claimant in the provided cases.)

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The rent for a short-term tenancy was set at £1,500 per month.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court considered the property's size, location, and market conditions to determine the rent.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988, Section 14 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the market value of the property and the length of the tenancy.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the tenant.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should consider the market value of the property and the length of the tenancy when determining rent.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence of comparable properties and market conditions was important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, an application may be made to the Upper Tribunal for permission to appeal on a point of law.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent determination.

Official source: First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.