First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal set the new monthly rent for a tenant's home at £981, effective from April 2026. The decision was based on what similar properties would reasonably cost in the open market under current laws and without considering specific repairs or improvements made by the tenant.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to have their rent determined at a level that reflects what would reasonably be expected in the open market under section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.
📖 What the law says
Under this section, a tenant can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under an assured tenancy, excluding relevant low-cost tenancies. The tribunal will then determine the rent that a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured tenancy based on available evidence and statutory assumptions.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured tenancy based on statutory assumptions and available evidence, setting it at £981 pcm from April 2026.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Dismissed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference CAM/42UJ/MNR/2026/0052 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Tenant [NAME] and [COUNSEL] Tenant’s Representative Landlord [COMPANY] Landlord’s [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Landlord’s Representative Date of Application 20 March 2026 Type of Application Determination of a market rent under sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Members Judge [NAME] of Decision 10 June 2026 Rent Determined £981 per calendar month Date the new rent takes effect 01 April 2026
2
REASONS FOR THE
DECISION Background 1. On 24 February 2026, the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £981 per calendar month (pcm) in place of the existing rent of £880 pcm to take effect from 01 April 2026.
2. On 20 March 2026, under 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 assured tenancy commenced 01 October 2005 for a term of 12 months. The rental period is monthly. Allocation of liability for repairs 4. The Tribunal has proceeded on the basis that the usual repairing obligations under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 apply. No specific adjustment to the market rent is required in respect of repairing obligations. Furniture and services, including the provision of any furniture by the Landlord and the provision of carpets, curtains and white goods, and the cost thereof 5. None Liability for Council Tax 6. The Tenant is responsible for the payment of Council Tax in respect of the Property. The rent determined is exclusive of Council Tax. Any other terms which the Tribunal considers relevant 7. None Inspection/Hearing
3 8. Neither party requested an oral hearing. The Tribunal has considered this case on the basis of the papers provided by the parties and its own knowledge and specialist expertise. The Property 9. The Property is a three-bedroom semi-detached house. It comprises a living/dining room, a kitchen, three bedrooms (one with en-suite facilities), a family bathroom, a downstairs WC, together with a rear garden and driveway. Evidence The Tenants 10. The Tenants provided photographs of the Property but no rental comparators. They raised concerns regarding the condition of the Property, including issues of disrepair and mould, but provided no evidence in support of those issues. The Tenants also stated that they had fitted a new kitchen but again provided no evidence in support. Those matters have been considered insofar as they may affect rental value. The Landlord 11. The Landlord did not reply to the application and provided no evidence. Determination and Valuation 12. The Tribunal is required to determine the rent at which the Property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord, in accordance with section 14 of the Housing Act 1988. The determination is made on the statutory assumptions in section 14, including that the tenancy is a periodic tenancy with the same rental periods and on the same terms, save as to the amount of rent.
13. No comparable lettings evidence was provided by either party. The Tribunal has therefore determined the rent by reference to the material before it, including the description and photographs of the Property, the terms of the tenancy, the statutory assumptions and disregards in section 14, and its own knowledge and specialist expertise, including the professional expertise of its valuer member.
14. The Tribunal has considered the characteristics of the Property, including its size, accommodation and amenities, together with the photographic evidence. The Property is a three-bedroom semi-detached house with a living/dining
4 room, kitchen, three bedrooms, one en-suite, a family bathroom, a downstairs WC, rear garden and driveway.
15. The Tribunal has considered the Tenants’ assertions concerning mould and disrepair. However, no independent evidence, inspection report, repair correspondence, photographs clearly evidencing mould, or other supporting material was provided from which the Tribunal could make any quantified deduction from the open market rent. The Tribunal has therefore taken those matters into account only to the extent that they are supported by the material before it and does not consider that they justify any further reduction.
16. The Tenants also stated that they had fitted a new kitchen. No evidence was provided as to the nature, extent, timing, cost or funding of that work, nor as to whether it was carried out by the Tenants rather than the Landlord. In any event, section 14(2)(b) requires the Tribunal to disregard any increase in rental value attributable to a relevant improvement carried out by the tenant.
Accordingly, the Tribunal has made no upward adjustment to reflect any alleged tenant improvement.
17. The Tribunal has also disregarded any effect on the rent attributable to the grant of a tenancy to sitting tenants and any reduction in value attributable to any failure by the Tenants to comply with the terms of the tenancy, as required by section 14(2) of the 1988 Act.
18. Doing the best it can on the evidence available, and applying its specialist judgment, the Tribunal is satisfied that the proposed rent of £981 per calendar month is not above the open market rent reasonably to be expected for the Property on the statutory assumptions. Undue hardship 19. The new rent takes effect from the date specified in the Landlord’s notice of increase unless that would cause undue hardship to the tenant. Where undue hardship is established, the Tribunal has a discretion to fix a later starting date, up to the date on which the Tribunal makes its determination.
20. The Tenants stated in their application that the rent increase would cause hardship. However, no evidence was provided to establish undue hardship within the meaning of the Act.
21. The Tribunal therefore makes no adjustment to the effective date.
5 Decision 22. Therefore, the Tribunal determines the market rent at £981 per calendar month with effect from 01 April 2026. APPEAL PROVISIONS 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 statement of reasons (regulation 52 (2) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013) stating the grounds upon which it is intended to rely in the appeal.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Market Rent Due to Property Issues
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Market Rent for HMO Room: £600 PCM
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for HMO Room
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rental Rate for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £725 PCM for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy
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
- Rent should be set based on local comparables and the condition of the accommodation.
- Rent should be adjusted based on the condition of the property and any ongoing issues affecting its use.
- Rent should be determined by the First-tier Tribunal if the landlord serves a notice proposing an increase under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- Rent was set without considering the property's condition compared to similar properties in the area.
- Rent was set without a fair and reasonable open market assessment as required by sections 13 & 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 set the new rent at £981 per month, effective from April 2026.
Who was involved?
A tenant and a landlord were involved in the case.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on what similar properties would reasonably cost in the open market under current laws.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Housing Act 1988 sections 13 and 14 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The lack of comparable rental evidence led to a decision based on statutory assumptions.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone facing rent determination should provide detailed evidence of comparable rents and property conditions.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Photographs and descriptions of the property were considered, but no rental comparators were provided.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, an appeal can be made to the Upper Tribunal on points of law within 28 days.
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.
