VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Grants Rent Reduction Due to Property Condition

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal granted a rent reduction to a tenant because the property was in a worse condition than expected. The rent was set at £1625 per month instead of the landlord's proposed £1800 per month.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a rent reduction if the property is in a condition below what is expected for a contemporary letting.

Topics

rent determinationproperty condition

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

This section allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to 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 might expect to receive for renting the property in the open market.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined a reduced rent of £1625 per month following an inspection of the property's condition.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined a rent of £1625 per month for a property in less than expected condition, reducing the landlord's proposed rent of £1800 per month.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

1

Case Reference

: HS/LON/OOAS/MNR/2025/0872

Property : [ADDRESS]. Pinner,

Middlesex, [POSTCODE]

Tenant

: Mrs [APPELLANT], Mr [APPELLANT]

Landlord : [COMPANY]: [RESPONDENT] of Objection : 22 June 2025

Type of Application : Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988

Tribunal

: [NAME] [NAME] of Full Reasons : 25 November 2025

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025

_______________________________________________

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £1,625.00 per month to be paid from 25 November 2025 under the Housing Act 1988 section 13. ____________________________________

Full Reasons

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

Background

1. On 25 June 2025 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1800.00 per month in place of the existing rent of £1500.00 per month to take effect from 25 June 2025.

2. An application dated 22 June 2025 was made Section 13(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988, the Tenant referred the Landlord’s notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal for determination of a market rent.

3. The application was accompanied by the Notice of Increase of Rent and, a copy of the tenancy agreement which was initially commenced on 25 February 2020 for a period of 1 year concluding on 24 February 2021.

4. Directions were issued to the parties on 23 September 2025.

Inspection

5. The Tribunal did inspect the property on the same day as the hearing and found the flat to be purpose built within a 1930s building. The area is a pleasant mix of roads of detached and semidetached houses dating from the 1930s. The flat has a garden within the garden is bass where the shed had been, brick bult garage and the garden is surrounded by a wooden fence. The fence has one panel detached from its post at the top. Entering in through the UPVC front door a hall is reached, off the hall to the right is a kitchen there is bubbling plaster along the internal skirting board, the floor is laminate. The kitchen has a boiler which supplies central heating to radiators in all the rooms. All rooms have double glazing. The kitchen oven has holders in the base of the oven. The kitchen is functional but tired. The next room reached is the living room. There are two bedrooms. The rooms at places have wallpaper becoming detached, plaster bubbling, and there is slight mould identified in some places.

Hearing

6. Present at the hearing were: the applicant Mr [APPELLANT] and Mr [APPELLANT]. and for the respondent [APPELLANT], Ms [APPELLANT] [NAME].

[NAME]

7. The applicant provided a summary of their case that had been submitted on papers previously.

8. The [NAME] provided several documents to the tribunal including the Notice of Increase, the tenancy agreement.

9. The applicant submitted a number of photographs including, one said to be a broken oven, brief marketing details of a comparable properties in [NAME] asking rents of £1600pcm and £1675 pcm, various pictures of the interior of the property and exterior shed.

10. The applicant also complete a Reply Form, requesting an inspection and a hearing. The form also noted that the property comprises a one-bedroom flat, on the ground floor. Details of the accommodation and its said condition were included in the form and noted by the tribunal. The applicant notes that the property has central heating, double glazing and white goods supplied by the tenant. The tenant also supplying curtains and the landlord carpets. There is also a garage. It is noted that the shed and garden fence are in disrepair. The tenant further reports, the central heating and kitchen are old, and the windows are drafty. That the oven is in poor condition and the door frame and skirting boards are rotten due to previous leaks. The carpets are old and faded in colour, showing signs of long-term use.

[NAME]

11. The [NAME] submitted a number of documents including a document titled “Section 13 Rent assessment Submission.” The landlord provided four comparables.

[ADDRESS] 2 bed maisonette with private rear garden and modern kitchen in September 2025 at £1750 pcm

[ADDRESS] first floor maisonette private rear garden double glazed windows listed August 2025 at £1750 pcm

[ADDRESS], ground floor maisonette with a modern interior and garden at £ 1750 pcm

[ADDRESS], spacious 2 bed flat garden access close to shops and transport listed June 2025 at £1800 pcm.

12. The [NAME] submitted a completed Reply form.

13. The respondent gave a summary of their case as laid out in the papers submitted.

Analysis and Value

14. The tribunal first in consideration of the comparables presented and its own expert knowledge determined the level of rent the property would let for if in good tenantable condition. The tribunal determines £1700 per month.

15. Then the tribunal had recourse to the actual condition. The property is in less than that expected for a contemporary letting and less than that of the landlords' comparables.

16. To accommodate these the tribunal makes a reduction of £75.00 per month, giving a determination for the property in its current condition of £1625 per month.

4

Undue Hardship 17. The tenant made application for hardship and described the two self-employed roles they have but also that they relied on Housing Benefit. The applicants stated they had no savings and so payment of a back dated increase would cause undue hardship. The respondent stated they contended for the increase as stated within the Notice of Increase of Rent. Decision 18. The Tribunal determines £1,625.00 per month from 25 November 2025 in accordance with section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 Chairman: [NAME]: 25 November 2025

Appeal to the Upper Tribunal A person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Property Chamber) on a point of law must seek permission to do so by making a written application to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional Office which has been dealing with the case which application must: a. be received by the said office within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision. b. identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party making the application is seeking. If the application is not received within the 28 –day time limit, it must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for it not complying with the 28- day time limit; the Tribunal will then decide whether to extend time or not to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed.

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. HS/LON/OOAS/MNR/2025/0872

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], Pinner, Middlesex. [POSTCODE]

[NAME] [NAME]

Landlord [APPELLANT]

Tenant Mrs [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 1625.00 Per Calendar month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 25 November 2025

*3. The amount included for services is/is

negligible/not applicable n/a Per n/a

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 25 February 2020

6. Length of the term or rental period 12 months

7. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord external structural

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord

9. Description of premises Ground floor Living room and separate dining room, kitchen, WC 2 bedrooms, garden and garage.

[NAME] of Decision 25 November 2025

📊 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 property is in a condition below contemporary standards.
  • The condition of the property is taken into account for determining the fair market rent.
  • Improvements made by the tenant are considered when setting a new market rent.
  • A fair market rent is assessed based on comparable properties.
  • Rent adjustments are based on the actual condition and value of the property.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal decided to reduce the rent to £1625 per month due to the property's condition.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved in the dispute over the rent.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court inspected the property and found it to be in a condition below what is expected for a contemporary letting, leading to a rent reduction.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 sections 13 and 14 were applied to determine the market rent.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the condition of the property, which was found to be below standard.

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

The decision was for the tenant who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should ensure the property is in good condition to avoid rent reductions.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Photographs and descriptions of the property's condition were important evidence.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal within 28 days.

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.

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.