VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

In this case, a tenant challenged their landlord's proposed increase in rent. The tribunal reviewed comparable properties and set the new rent at £650 per month, which is fair considering local market conditions.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to have their rent set at a fair market value considering comparable properties in the area.

Topics

tenancyrent control

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.13

This section of the Housing Act 1988 applies to certain types of assured tenancies, excluding relevant low-cost tenancies. It allows landlords to serve a notice proposing an increase in rent, which must take effect at least two months after the notice is served. There are additional conditions regarding when the rent increase can be proposed again after previous increases.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured shorthold tenancy based on comparables and current rental values.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined the fair market rent for an assured shorthold tenancy based on comparables and current rental values, setting it at £650 pcm.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Case Reference

MAN/00EX/MNR/2026/0117

[ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant

[NAME] & [COUNSEL] [NAME]

Tenant’s Representative

Landlord

[COUNSEL]

Landlord’s [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Landlord’s [NAME] (transferred to [ADDRESS] – Blackburn)

Date of Application

9 March 2026

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

Tribunal Members Tribunal Judge Steer & Mr J Faulkner FRICS

Date of Decision

19 May 2026

Rent Determined

£650.00 per calendar month

Date the new rent takes effect

1 May 2026

2

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

Background

1. On 13 February 2026, the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £800.00 per calendar month (pcm) in place of the existing rent of £650.00 pcm to take effect from 1 May 2026.

2. On 9 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 on 1 August 2020 which appears to be for an initial fixed term although the length of term is illegible from the copy of the assured shorthold tenancy agreement provided by the Tenant. The tenancy continues as a statutory periodic tenancy at the end of the fixed term. The rental period is monthly.

Allocation of Repairs between Landlord and Tenant.

4. As per section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

Services Charges or furniture provided by Landlord (other than carpets and curtain and white goods specified below) and the costs relating to the same.

5. There are no service charges payable in respect of the Property which was let to the Tenants on an ‘unfurnished’ basis.

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 of the tenancy taken into consideration in determining the rent.

7. None

Inspection/Hearing

8. The Tenant did not request a property inspection or an oral hearing. The Landlord did not respond to the Tenant’s application and has provided no evidence to the Tribunal. The Tribunal has considered this case on the basis of the papers provided by the Tenant and its own knowledge and specialist expertise.

3

The Property

9. The Property is a 2-storey terrace house with a garden built in the 1970’s and accessed by a pedestrian walkway. The tenancy agreement states that the Property is let unfurnished. The accommodation comprises a ground floor living room and kitchen and there are two bedrooms, a box room and a bathroom with w/c on the first floor.

Evidence

The Landlord

10. The Landlord did not return the Tribunal’s Reply form or provide any evidence to the Tribunal to support the proposed rental increase.

The Tenant

11. The Tenant made the following comments:

a) The garage does not form part of the demise of the Property and is not accessible to the Tenant given that it is rented to a third party;

b) The Property does not have direct road access either from the front or the rear of the Property. The front of the Property leads to a pedestrian walkway meaning that vehicular access is restricted. The rear of the Property is accessed via a narrow alleyway which is in poor condition; and

c) Generally, that the rental increase proposed by the Landlord is above market rent for the Property when considering the above issues and the comparable rents on the same street.

12. In terms of rental evidence, the Tenant has provided two comparable achieved rents on the same street as the subject property which are of the same type and lay out as the subject property. The first is [ADDRESS] and the current rent payable is £550 pcm. The second is [ADDRESS] and the current rent payable is £500 pcm. The Tenant states that the proposed rent of £800 pcm is above market rent for a terraced property and provided evidence of a semi- detached property in the locality which is marketed for rent at £800 pcm.

Determination and Valuation

14. The Tribunal considers that the comparables provided by the Tenant are relevant to this matter particularly in light of the fact that they appear to be current achieved rents for the same type of property on the same street.

15. Relying on its own expertise and general knowledge of rental values in the area, the current rent and the comparables provided by the Tenant, the Tribunal considers that the market rental of the subject Property is £650 pcm. This is the

4

rent we would expect the Property to let for in the open market. The Tribunal did not consider it necessary to make any adjustments to this level of rent.

Decision

16. Therefore, the Tribunal determines the market rent at £650.00 per calendar month with effect from 01 May 2026.

5

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:

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 at a fair market value based on comparable properties in the area.
  • Rent should be adjusted based on the condition of shared facilities and utilities provided by the landlord.
  • Rent should be determined fairly based on comparable properties and ongoing issues affecting the property's use.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • Rent should be set at a fair market value based on comparable properties but may be affected by additional factors such as property condition and ongoing issues.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The tribunal set the market rent for an assured tenancy at £650 pcm.

Who was involved?

A tenant and a landlord were involved in setting the rental price.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court reviewed comparable properties to determine fair market value.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Housing Act 1988 sections 13 & 14.

What was the argument that mattered most?

Comparables showing similar properties renting for less than £800 pcm.

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

The tenant won, as their proposed rent of £650 pcm was accepted.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Tenants can challenge unfair rental increases by providing evidence of comparable rents.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence of comparable properties and current rental values.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, either party may appeal 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.

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.