VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Reduces Proposed Rent Increase for Assured Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal reduced the proposed rent increase for an assured periodic tenancy after considering the property's condition and comparables in the area. The decision took effect on bk 1 May 2025.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a rent level that reflects the open market value of the property, taking into account its condition and amenities.

Topics

rent determinationassured periodic tenancyproperty conditions

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

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 the rent based on what a willing landlord would expect to receive for letting the property in the open market. This determination considers the property's condition and the terms of the existing tenancy.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal reduced the proposed rent increase after considering the property's condition and comparables in the area.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal reduced the proposed rent increase for an assured periodic tenancy after considering the property's condition and comparables in the area. The decision took effect on 1 May 2025.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00AG/MNR/2025/0806

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] [POSTCODE]

[NAME]

Landlord [APPELLANT]

[APPELLANT] [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 1100 Per Calendar month

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 1 May 2025

*3. The amount included for services is Nil Per

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included N/A

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 29 March 2019

6. Length of the term or rental period Calendar monthly periodic

7. Allocation of liability for repairs Per tenancy

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Bed frame/ mattress, wardrobe, chest of drawers, table, 2 chairs, [APPELLANT]’s refridgerator

9. Description of premises A bed sitting room with kitchenette in a former large family terraced house on 4 levels from the late Victorian period. Property is a non-self contained flat on the lower ground floor level. Double pitched tiled roof, brick faced main walls.. Property is a room double glazed and central heating with kitchenette. Shared use of bathroom/ WC 2 floors above, shared with multiple other residents. Heating/ hot water and cleaning communal areas included. Council tax and other services exclude. The Landlord may charge a rent up to but, not in excess of the figure shown at box 1.

[NAME] of Decision 2 September 2025

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2013

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00AG/MNR/2025/0808 Property : [ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], Camden London Nw3 4DL Applicant: [redacted] : None Respondent : [redacted] Representative : [COUNSEL] (Agent) Type of Application : Section 13(4) Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Members :

[NAME] and venue of Hearing : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of Decision : 2 September 2025

REASONS FOR DECISION

Background

1 The First Tier Tribunal received an application dated 23 April 2025 from the [APPELLANT] of the Property, regarding a notice of increase of rent served by the landlord, under S.13 of the Housing Act 1988 (the Act).

2 The notice, dated 26 March 2025, proposed a new rent of £1450 per calendar month (including hot water and heating costs) with effect from and including 1 May 2025. The passing rent was said to be £825 pcm.

2

3 The tenancy is an assured periodic montly tenancy. A copy of the last tenancy agreement was provided. The original tenancy ran from 20 March 2019.

4 Directions dated 7 July 2025 were issued representations on the substantive issue of the new rent. Neither party requested a hearing. The Tribunal does not routinely carry out inspections.

5 The Tribunal carefully considered and noted such representations as it received from both parties and the location layout size and condition of the Property and other available and let comparable properties nearby.

Property

6 The Property is one room known as Flat 3, within a purpose multiple bedroom mid terraced house (building) in a long terrace of late Victorian formerly large single family homes on 4 levels, in an established residential estate of similar blocks within LB Camden. Accommodation is on one level, 1 bed sitting room with kitchenette. It has the use of bathroom/wc on a floor 2 levels above the Property. It is shared with multiple other residents of the building. The building has fair faced brick external walls and a double pitched tiled roof over. (Google Streetview August 2022).

7 The Tribunal assumes that Property and furniture in the exclusive area within and there shared areas were let in fair to good condition and that all services provided are reliable and of a modern specification for the market. The Property included furniture of bed frame and mattress, wardrobe, chest of drawers, table, 2 chairs. The [APPELLANT] provided the replacement fridge instead of the landlord.

Law

8 In accordance with the terms of S14 of the Housing Act 1988 we are required to determine the rent at which we consider the property 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 [APPELLANT]’s improvements and any decrease in value due to the [APPELLANT]’s failure to comply with any terms of the tenancy. Thus the Property falls to be valued as it stands; assuming it to be in reasonable internal decorative condition.

Decision

9 Based on the Tribunal’s own general knowledge of market rent levels in LB Camden determines that the subject Property would let on a normal Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST) terms, for £1300 per calendar month (including all bills for heating and hot water at and to the Property), fully fitted and in good order. The Property had the significant disadvantage of being non-self-contained and lacking its own shower/

3 WC. This draw back has become an increasingly significant factor in recent years, on rent levels. The shared facility was apparently located on a level 2 floors higher and shared with several other tenants of the building. For this significant disadvantage, the Tribunal deducts £200.

10 The new rent will therefore be £1100 per calendar month with effect from 1 May 2025. The Landlord is not obliged to charge this sum and may charge a significantly lower rent as a result of their own choice, policy, or governmental regulation. They may not however, charge a rent in excess of it.

Name: N. [NAME]: 2 September 2025

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 either party is dissatisfied with this decision, they may apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on any point of law arising from this Decision.

Prior to making such an appeal, an application must be made, in writing, to this Tribunal for permission to appeal. Any such application must be made within 28 days of the issue of this decision to the person making the application (regulation 52 (2) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rule 2013).

If the application is not made within the 28-day time limit, such application 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 application for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit.

The application 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 making the application is seeking.

If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).

📊 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 poor condition.
  • Rent should reflect the open market value of the property.
  • Adjustments are made based on the property's condition.
  • Comparable evidence and local rental values determine the market rent.
  • Rent determination is based on section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.

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 proposed rent increase for an assured periodic tenancy.

Who was involved?

The case involved a tenant and a landlord.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to reduce the rent based on the property's condition and comparables in the area.

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 condition and amenities of the property compared to similar properties in the area.

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 condition and amenities of their property when disputing a rent increase.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence and documents related to the property's condition and comparables in the area 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 always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent disputes.

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.