VadeLab
OtherFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £1,245 Monthly

Case No.

📌 In brief

In this case, the First-tier Tribunal reviewed written submissions from a tenant and landlord to determine a fair market rent of £1,245 per month for an assured periodic tenancy. The decision was based on the property's condition and comparable rental values in the area.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to have the First-tier Tribunal determine a fair market rent for their property when disputing a landlord's proposed rent increase under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.

Topics

tenancy disputesrent determination

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant with an assured tenancy to apply to the appropriate tribunal to challenge a proposed rent increase. The tribunal will then determine a fair market rent for the property. However, applications cannot be made if the current rent is based on a previous determination under this section or if more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on written submissions without holding an oral hearing.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal determined a fair market rent of £1,245 per month for an assured periodic tenancy after reviewing written submissions from both parties. The tribunal considered the property's condition and market comparables to set the new rent.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Other

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. CHI/45UG/MNR/2023/0201

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 14 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME] Mr [RESPONDENT] Mr [RESPONDENT]

Landlord Mr [RESPONDENT] c/o [RESPONDENT], 41 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Ms [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 1245.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 15 August 2023

3. The amount included for services is not applicable n/a Per n/a

4. Date assured tenancy commenced December 2017

5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord

8. Description of premises 3 bedroom house (1 bedroom is on ground floor).

[NAME] of Decision 9 October 2023

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : CHI/45UG/MNR/2023/0201 Property : 14 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Applicant Tenant : Ms [COUNSEL] :

None

Respondent Landlord : Mr [COUNSEL] : [NAME] of Application :

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

Tribunal Members : Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] of Inspection : None. Paper determination Date of Decision :

9th October 2023

DECISION

CHI/45UG/MNR/2023/0201

2 Summary of Decision 1. On 9th October 2023 the Tribunal determined a market rent of £1,245 per month to take effect from 15th August 2023.

Background 2. The case concerned the determination of a market rent for the subject property following a referral of the Landlord’s notice of increase of rent by the Tenant pursuant to sections 13 and 14 Housing Act 1988.

3. On 11th July 2023 the Landlord’s Agent served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,450 per month in place of the existing rent of £1,125 per month to take effect from 15th August 2023. The notice complied with the legal requirements.

4. On 9th August 2023 the Tenant applied to the Tribunal under Section 13(4) (a) of the Housing Act 1988.

5. The Tribunal does not consider it necessary and proportionate in cases of this nature to undertake inspections or hold Tribunal hearings unless either are specifically requested by either party or a particular point arises which merits such an inspection and/or hearing.

6. The Tribunal issued directions on 18th September 2023 informing the parties that, unless either party objected, the Tribunal intended to determine the rent based on written representations. The parties were invited to make submissions which could include photographs or videos.

7. Both parties submitted papers by the specified dates. The papers were also copied to the other party.

8. Neither party objected to the matter being determined without an oral hearing, so the Tribunal determined the case on 9th October 2023 based on the written representations received. The Property 9. From the information given in the papers and available on the internet, the property comprises a semi-detached house, formerly a single storey, situated in a village about 9 miles southwest of [ADDRESS].

10. The accommodation is listed as including a Living Room, Kitchen, Bathroom and one Bedroom on the ground floor, with 2 additional Bedrooms and an en- suite Bathroom on the first floor. There are gardens to front and rear and off- street parking. Submissions 11. The Energy Performance Rating is ‘E’ although the Landlord claims that this should be upgraded following the first-floor extension building works.

12. The initial tenancy began in December 2017. The Landlord’s Agent states that there is partial double-glazing, central heating and that carpets, curtains and a

CHI/45UG/MNR/2023/0201

3 cooker are provided, that the property was converted some 10-12 years ago. The bathroom and kitchen were renewed at around the same time.

13. The Agent provides a price comparison report from Rightmove suggesting rents between £1,400 and £1,700 per month but no evidence of actual lets agreed. An Electrical report dated 20th April 2022 is also provided which rates the electrical installation as “Satisfactory”.

14. The Tenant refers to a number of historic issues and states that the extractor fan in the first floor is defective, hot water supply is intermittent, that the Saniflow unit in the first floor bathroom needs replacing, the kitchen units are old, she has replaced a defective fridge, the oven hood in the kitchen is defective, and there are intermittent problems with lights.

15. The Tenant says she has carried out a number of repairs herself and refers to inappropriate repairs to a garden fence organised by the Landlord.

16. The Tenant provides photographs showing the poor condition of external dormer windows, missing roof tiles, the defective extractor in the kitchen, lack of insulation in first floor eaves and defective tiling in the bathroom. The Law S14 Determination of Rent by First-tier Tribunal

(1) Where, under subsection (4) (a) of section 13 above, a tenant refers to a First-tier Tribunal a notice under subsection (2) of that section, the Tribunal shall determine the rent at which, subject to subsections (2) and (4) below, the Tribunal consider that the dwelling-house concerned might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a [NAME] 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; and (d) in respect of which the same notices, if any, have been given under any of Grounds 1 to 5 of Schedule 2 to this Act, as have been given (or have effect as if given) in relation to 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 his immediate landlord, or

CHI/45UG/MNR/2023/0201

4 (ii) was carried out pursuant to an obligation to his immediate landlord being an obligation which did not relate to the specific improvement concerned but arose by reference to consent given to the carrying out of that improvement; and (c) any reduction in the value of the dwelling-house attributable to a failure by the tenant to comply with any terms of the tenancy.

(3) For the purposes of subsection (2)(b) above, in relation to a notice which is referred by a tenant as mentioned in subsection (1) above, an improvement is a relevant improvement if either it was carried out during the tenancy to which the notice relates, or the following conditions are satisfied, namely-

(a) that it was carried out not more than twenty-one years before the date of service of the notice; and (b) that, at all times during the period beginning when the improvement was carried out and ending on the date of service of the notice, the dwelling- house has been let under an assured tenancy; and (c) that, on the coming to an end of an assured tenancy at any time during that period, the tenant (or, in the case of [NAME], at least one of them) did not quit.

(4) In this section "rent" does not include any service charge, within the meaning of section 18 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, but, subject to that, includes any sums payable by the tenant to the landlord on account of the use of furniture, in respect of council tax or for any of the matters referred to in subsection (1) (a) of that section, whether or not those sums are separate from the sums payable for the occupation.

Consideration and Valuation 17. The Tribunal first considered whether it felt able to reasonably and fairly decide this case based on the papers submitted only with no oral hearing. Having read and considered the papers it decided that it could do so.

18. The Tribunal is required to determine the rent at which the subject property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a [NAME] under an assured tenancy. The personal circumstances of the Parties are not relevant to this issue.

19. Having carefully considered the representations from the parties and associated correspondence and using its own judgement and knowledge of rental values in West Sussex the Tribunal decided that the market rent for the subject property if let today in a condition that was usual for such an open market letting would be £1,500 per month.

20. However, the property is not let in a condition or on terms that would command such a rent and a number of adjustments need to be made to reflect this, not least the age and quality of the fittings.

21. The age and condition of some fittings and decoration is not agreed by the parties but the Tribunal accepts that the fittings are generally in excess of 10

CHI/45UG/MNR/2023/0201

5 years old and, as evidenced by the cooker extractor hood, are in need of updating. 22. Using its experience the Tribunal decided that the following adjustments should be made: Tenant’s provision of white goods £30 Dated bathroom, intermittent hot water and extractor fan £50 Dated kitchen fittings £100 General condition and lack of maintenance £75

____ TOTAL per month £255

23. The Tenant made no representation that the starting date for the new rent specified in the Landlord’s notice would cause the Tenant undue hardship. Determination 24. The Tribunal therefore decided that the rent at which the subject property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a [NAME] under the terms of this assured tenancy was £1,245 per month.

25. The Tribunal directed that the new rent of £1,245 per month should take effect from 15th August 2023, this being the date specified in the notice.

RIGHTS OF APPEAL

1. A person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) must seek permission to do so by making written application to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case. Where possible you should send your application for permission to appeal by email to [EMAIL] as this will enable the First-tier Tribunal Regional office to deal with it more efficiently.

2. The application must arrive at the Tribunal within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision.

3. If the person wishing to appeal does not comply with the 28-day time limit, the person shall include with the application for permission to appeal a request for an extension of time and the reason for 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.

4. The application for permission to appeal must 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.

📊 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 Tribunal accepted that the property's fittings were generally over 10 years old and needed updating.
  • The new rent was set to take effect from August 15, 2023, as specified in the landlord's notice.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The landlord's claim that the Energy Performance Rating should be upgraded was not explicitly accepted.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The First-tier Tribunal set a fair market rent of £1,245 per month for an assured periodic tenancy.

Who was involved?

A tenant and landlord were involved in the dispute over rent determination.

How did the court decide, and why?

The tribunal decided based on written submissions from both parties without holding a hearing. The decision considered the property's condition and market comparables.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988 was applied to determine the fair rent for an assured periodic tenancy.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The property's condition and market comparables played a crucial role in determining the fair rent.

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

It is unclear without knowing which party initiated the dispute, but the tribunal set a new rent based on its findings.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone disputing a landlord's proposed rent increase can seek a fair market determination from the First-tier Tribunal.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Photographs, property descriptions, and rental comparables were important in making the decision.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions of the First-tier Tribunal can often be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).

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

It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.

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.