VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal set a market rent of £517 per month for an assured periodic tenancy, considering factors like the property's condition and amenities. The Tribunal rejected the landlord's proposed rent increase of £434.59 per month.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent for their assured periodic tenancy.

Topics

market rentassured tenancy

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 a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under their tenancy. The tribunal will then determine a fair market rent based on what a willing landlord would charge for a similar property under a periodic assured tenancy. The determination considers the property's condition and amenities, excluding factors like improvements made by the tenant or reductions due to non-compliance.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal set a market rent for an assured periodic tenancy.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal determined a market rent of £517 per month for an assured periodic tenancy, considering the property's condition and amenities. The Tribunal rejected the landlord's proposed rent increase of £434.59 per month.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. CHI/00HH/MNR/2024/0147

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 1 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

[NAME] Mr [RESPONDENT] [NAME]

Landlord [COMPANY], [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Miss [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 517.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 1 July 2024

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

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 16 October 2010

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 2-bedroom purpose bult ground floor flat

[NAME] of Decision 3 February 2025

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : CHI/00HH/MNR/2024/0147 Property : 1 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Applicant Tenant : Ms [COUNSEL] :

None

Respondent Landlord : [COMPANY] : None Type of Application :

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

Tribunal Members : Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] J [NAME] of Inspection : 3rd February 2025

Date of Decision

:

3rd February 2025

DECISION

CHI/00HH/MNR/2024/0147

2

Summary of Decision 1. On 3rd February 2025 the Tribunal determined a market rent of £517 per month to take effect from 1st July 2024.

2. This rent is higher than the amount requested by the Landlord. The Landlord is not obliged to charge this higher rent. Background 3. 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.

4. On 20th May 2024 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £434.59 per month, in place of the existing rent of £403.52 per month, to take effect from 1st July 2024. The notice complied with the legal requirements.

5. On 13th June 2024 the Tenant applied to the Tribunal under Section 13(4) (a) of the Housing Act 1988.

6. The Tribunal does not routinely 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.

7. The Tribunal issued Directions on 30th August 2024 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.

8. The Landlord and Tenant both submitted a Rent Appeal Statement that they had copied to the other party.

9. Neither party objected to the matter being determined without an oral hearing, so the Tribunal determined the case on 3rd February 2025 based on the written representations received.

10. These reasons address in summary form the key issues raised by the parties. They do not recite each and every point referred to either in submissions or during any hearing. However, this does not imply that any points raised, or documents not specifically mentioned were disregarded. If a point or document was referred to in the evidence or submissions that was relevant to a specific issue, then it was considered by the Tribunal. The Tribunal concentrates on those issues which, in its opinion, are fundamental to the application. 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

CHI/00HH/MNR/2024/0147

3 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 (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 joint tenants, 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

CHI/00HH/MNR/2024/0147

4 subsection (1) (a) of that section, whether or not those sums are separate from the sums payable for the occupation. The Property 11. From the information given in the papers and available on the internet, the property comprises a purpose-built ground floor flat within a modern block of similar properties on the western side of Paignton.

12. There is a good range of amenities within the town.

13. The accommodation includes a Living Room, Kitchen, 2 Bedrooms and a Bathroom with WC. Outside there is off-road parking and communal gardens. There is gas-fired central heating and double-glazed windows. The Tenant provides carpets, curtains and white goods. Submissions 14. The initial tenancy began on 16th October 2010 at a rent of £349.17 including £51.25 for services.

15. The Tenant states that the Landlord was to have fitted a Bathroom fan which has not been completed and there is damp in the Kitchen ceiling from a leak and damp within a storage cupboard.

16. Photographs provided by the Tenant show the property is ‘tired’ internally.

17. The Tenant also pays a service charge of £63 per month to cover cleaning and maintenance of common areas. Consideration and Valuation 18. 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.

19. 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. Such a letting would normally require the property to be in good and tenantable condition with carpets, curtains and white goods all provided by the Landlord.

20. Having carefully considered the representations from the parties and associated correspondence and using its own judgement and knowledge of rental values in Paignton, 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 £800 per month.

21. An open market letting would normally provide for the Landlord pay the service charge.

22. In addition to adjustments for the matters above the Tribunal decided that adjustments are justified to reflect the condition and damp issues.

CHI/00HH/MNR/2024/0147

5 23. Using its experience the Tribunal decided that the following adjustments should be made: Tenant’s provision of white goods £45 Tenant’s provision of carpets and curtains £75 Tenant’s payment of service charge £63 Damp issues £50 General ‘tired’ accommodation £50

____ TOTAL per month £283

24. 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 25. 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 £517 per month.

26. The Tribunal directed that the new rent of £517 per month should take effect from 1st July 2024 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 tenant is entitled to a fair market rent for their assured periodic tenancy.
  • The fair market rent is based on comparable evidence and the condition of the property.
  • The fair market rent is adjusted for the property's condition.
  • The fair market rent is determined under 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 First-tier Tribunal set a market rent of £517 per month for an assured periodic tenancy.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the property's condition and amenities, setting a higher rent than the landlord proposed.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988, specifically section 14, was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The condition and amenities of the property were crucial in determining the market rent.

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 entitled to a higher market rent if the property's condition and amenities justify it.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Photographs and statements regarding the property's condition and amenities 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 always recommended to get advice from a qualified solicitor for a case like this.

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.