First-tier Tribunal Reduces Rent Due to Property Condition
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal reduced the proposed rent for a flat in Norwich from £850 to £720 per month after considering the a person's condition and the surrounding commercial environment.
⚖️ Legal holding
Under the relevant tenancy legislation, the rent for a property should reflect its current condition and market value, excluding improvements made by the tenant.
📖 What the law says
Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant with an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine a new rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market. This includes considering the condition of the property and the surrounding environment.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal determined a new rent for a flat, considering its condition and location, ultimately setting the rent at £720 per month.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal received an application for a new rent determination under the Housing Act 1988. The Tribunal considered the property's condition and the surrounding commercial environment, reducing the proposed rent from £850 to £720 per month.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2013
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] CHAMBER ([NAME]) Case Reference : CAM/33UG/MNR/2024/0093 [NAME] : Flat 11 [NAME] 51 Prince of [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] (Tenants) Representative : [COUNSEL] (Housing Rights Worker) Respondent : [redacted] Representative : None Type of Application : S.13 Housing Act 1988 Determination of a new rent Tribunal Members : Mr [NAME]. [NAME] and venue of Meeting : 16 July 2024 First Tier Tribunal (Eastern) HMCTS Cambridge [POSTCODE] Date of Decision : 22 August 2024
REASONS FOR DECISION
Background
1 The First Tier Tribunal received an application dated 23 April 2024 from tenants of the [NAME], 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 7 March 2024, proposed a new rent of £850 per calendar month exclusive, with effect from and including 26 April 2024. This rent does not include other services. The passing rent was said to be £675 pcm from 26 January 2021.
2
3 The tenancy is an assured periodic monthly tenancy with effect from and including 26 January 2021. A copy was provided.
Directions
4 Directions, dated 17 May 2024, for the progression of the case, were issued by Legal [NAME]. A hearing via video link, was arranged for 16 July 2024. Both tenants attended with their representative, together with a representative for the landlord.
Inspection
5 There was no inspection. However from Google Streetview (@ August 2021) the Tribunal could see the front elevation. It appeared that the [NAME] is a small converted flat created from part of [NAME], itself a former office from the mid 1970’s. The conversion of the building was completed around 2016. The building is on 4 levels; ground floor commercial use with 3 floors of residential above. The commercial use underneath is a Tesco store open 7am to 11pm adjacent to Coral betting. When they are closed, the various “night spots” along Prince of [ADDRESS] are already open up for business instead.
6 The Prince of Wales road is busy, most hours of the day. With a cab office and “Sugar and Spice - Strip Club and Lap Dancing” to the south east. There are other night clubs immediately across the road from the building. The area also offers a range of late night food outlets; eat in or take away: Convenient for visitors to Town, but perhaps too “convenient”, for and disturbing to, residents nearby.
7 The building is on 4 levels. Brick fair faced to the front main elevation, capped off with a metal covered flat/ mansard roof forming the 4th level. The front external elevation appears in fair condition. There is no off street vehicle parking for residents and on street parking is heavily controlled.
8 The conversion of the former office building provides useful, if basic, residential space in a number of flats, near to the Town Centre, amenities and transport. Accommodation within the 43m2 gross internal floor area flat [NAME] on the second floor, consists of 2 rooms, kitchen and bathroom/ wc.
9 Aside from the communal internal entrance hall, stairwell and corridors serving the flats and a small bin and bike store to the ground floor, there are no exclusive or shared amenity areas. The former office lift serving all 4 levels from the ground floor had not been restored when the offices were converted into residential space.
10 The [NAME] has central heating but, appears to retain the original single glazed windows from its days as a former office block.
3 Tenant’s and Landlord’s Representations
11 The tenants provided written submissions via the standard Application Form and the Reply Form, to the Tribunal. The landlords also completed a standard Reply Form, as well as brief details in the initial notice. The Tribunal is grateful for such information as provided.
12 The tenants provided some 40 or so photographs. Although many were unclear they appeared to show cracking around the window frames and damp and mould on cold spots around the window openings. There was said to be a persistent problem with the communal door key fob.
13 There was also reference by the tenants to inadequate plumbing arrangements in both the kitchen and bathroom as a result of the basic standard of conversion around 2016. The landlord disputed the disrepair especially to the alleged plumbing defects. The landlord provided the carpets and white goods, save for the tenant’s replacement fridge. The tenant stated that the window coverings are theirs.
14 Although there were no specifics, the landlord referred to a number of recent lettings of similar space within the building at £850 pcm.
Law
15 In accordance with the terms of S14 of the Act we are required to determine the rent at which we consider the [NAME] 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 tenant’s improvements and any decrease in value due to the tenant’s failure to comply with any terms of the tenancy. Thus the [NAME] falls to be valued as it stands; but assuming the [NAME] is in a reasonable internal decorative condition.
Decision
16 From the Tribunal’s own general knowledge of market rent levels in Norwich it determines that the subject [NAME] would let on normal Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST) terms, for £800 per calendar month, fully fitted and in good order. The very commercial and busy nature of this particular part of the Town throughout the day and night will continue to limit the enjoyment and value of residential space here.
17 From the representations there were specific adjustments of £80 to be deducted from this figure for the apparent inherent disrepair to kitchen and bathroom plumbing and the absence of double glazing to windows. The tenant also provided the working fridge and curtains. This leaves an adjusted rent of £720 pcm. It is payable with effect from and including 29 March 2024. Although the landlord is not obliged to charge this new rent, they may not charge more.
[NAME] 22 August 2024
4
Rights of appeal
By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) ([NAME] 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) ([NAME] 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 [NAME], 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).
5 First-tier Tribunal – [NAME] Chamber
File Ref No. CAM/00UG/MNR/2024/ 0093
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 Flat 11 [NAME] 51 Prince of [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
[NAME] [APPELLANT]. Address
Tenant [APPELLANT] & [APPELLANT]
1. The rent is: £ 720 Per Calendar month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 26 April 2024
*3. The amount included for services is/is negligible/not applicable nil Per
*4. Service charges are variable and are not included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 26 January 2021 6. Length of the term or rental period periodic monthly 7. Allocation of liability for repairs Per tenancy 8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord .White goods, excepting tenant’s fridge
6 9. Description of premises Flat in low rise mid 1970’s former offices, on 4 levels on very busy main road. Located above/ opposite commercial ground floor uses of intense night time activity. Converted 2016 to small 1/ 2 bedroom flats on 4 levels. Lift never functioned. Accommodation 2 rooms kitchen bath/ wc. No double glazing. Central Heating. Basic conversion/ finishes. Landlords carpets. Tenant curtains. No off street parking, on street restrictions. Disrepair to windows & surrounds, condensation & mould. Basic plumbing defects to kitchen and bathroom.
[NAME] [NAME] of Decision 22 August 2024
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Reduced to £2,500 Due to Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent for Assured Shorthold Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment for Assured Shorthold Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment Based on Property Condition - First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Rent Adjustment Due to Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Rent Adjustment Due to Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment Due to Property Condition - First-tier Tribunal Decision
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 condition is poor.
- The property lacks necessary amenities.
- Rent adjustments are granted based on the property's condition alone.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal reduced the proposed rent from £850 to £720 per month.
Who was involved?
The tenant applied for a new rent determination, while the landlord proposed an increased rent.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to reduce the rent based on the property's condition and the surrounding commercial environment.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988 was applied to determine the rent.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that the property's condition and the surrounding commercial environment should affect the rent was crucial.
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 may be able to argue for a lower rent based on the property's condition and the surrounding environment.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Photographs showing the property's condition and the surrounding environment were important.
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 seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent determination.
