VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Decision — Case 4168113

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on the rent for an assured periodic tenancy. They set the monthly rent at £1025, excluding water rates and council tax but including service charges. This decision was made under the Housing Act 1988.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to have their rent set according to the Housing Act 1988 Section 14, as determined in this specific case involving a modern semi-detached house.

Topics

tenancy registrationrent determination

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, a tenant can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent of their assured tenancy, except if the rent is based on a previous tribunal determination or if more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy. The tribunal will then decide on the rent that a willing landlord would charge for a similar property in the open market.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal set the monthly rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £1025.00, effective from May 3, 2021.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988. The decision took effect on May 3, 2021, setting the monthly rent at £1025 excluding certain taxes and including service charges.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. BIR/00CS/MNR/2021/0024

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 69 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME] [NAME] Mr [RESPONDENT] [NAME]

Landlord [NAME] 128 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Ms [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £1025.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 03 May 2021

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 3 January 2020

6. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

7. Allocation of liability for repairs S. 11

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

9. Description of premises Modern three storey semi-detached house with open plan front garden and tarmac drive.

[NAME] [NAME] of Decision 23 July 2021

📊 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 tenant is entitled to have their rent registered under the Housing Act 1988.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • No significant factors identified that went against the claimant in these cases.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The rent for an assured periodic tenancy was set at £1025 per month, effective from May 2021.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was over the rent amount for an assured periodic tenancy.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to set the rent at £1025 per month, effective from May 2021, based on the Housing Act 1988, section 14.

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 application of the Housing Act 1988, section 14 to determine the rent.

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

The decision was for the person who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation can expect their rent to be determined according to the Housing Act 1988, section 14.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The judgment does not specify.

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.