First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Coventry Apartment
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided on the fair market rent for a two-bedroom apartment in Coventry after reviewing evidence provided by both parties. The final rent of £760 per month was set to take effect on May 20th, 2026.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to have their rent set at a fair market rate considering the property's condition and location.
📖 What the law says
This section allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the open-market rent, considering various factors including the terms of the existing tenancy and any improvements made by the tenant.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined the market rent for a two-bedroom apartment in Coventry based on comparable evidence and expert knowledge of rental values.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal determined the market rent of a two-bedroom ground floor apartment in Coventry, considering comparable evidence and expert knowledge. The rent was set at £760 per month with effect from May 20th, 2026.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed in Part
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
Case Reference
: BIR/00CQ/MNR/2026/0064
Property : 188 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Tenant
: [APPELLANT]
Landlord : [NAME]
Landlord’s agent : [RESPONDENT] of application : 14th March 2026
Type of Application : Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988
Tribunal Members : [NAME] [NAME] of Decision : 20th May 2026
_______________________________________________
DECISION
The Tribunal determines a rent of £760 (Seven Hundred and Sixty- Pounds) per calendar month with effect from 20th May 2026 ____________________________________
FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
2
REASONS FOR THE DECISION Background
1. On 18th 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 in place of the existing rent of £560.00 to take effect from 28th March 2026.
2. On 14th 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.
Inspection
3. The Tenant requested the Tribunal inspect the property. The request was declined by the Tribunal the parties being informed of such by means of Directions dated 27 April 2026. The Tribunal considered the case on the basis of the papers provided by the parties and having regard to its own knowledge, expertise and online research.
Evidence
4. The Tribunal considered the written submissions provided by both Tenant and Landlord. From the information provided it appears that the subject property is a 2-bedroom ground floor apartment the internal condition of which is in dispute between the parties.
5. The Tenant averred that due to ongoing issues within the property including damp and mould, they had to replace a numerous items during the tenancy with some requiring replacement on more than one occasion which in turn affects the market rent.
6. The Landlord disagreed with the Tenant’s contention regarding the internal condition of the property his position being supported by numerous professional reports within his submission together with a “Revocation of Improvement Notice” dated 29th of January 2026 issued by Coventry City Council confirming that all the works required under their Improvement Notice had been completed.
7. The Tenant contested that the property was let with the fixtures and fittings as identified in her submission and as such were part of the tenancy agreement.
8. The Landlord’s position was that whilst these fixtures and fittings were identified in an inventory dated November 2017 forming part of the original tenancy agreement, they were not part the current 2022 lease as the apartment having been let unfurnished.
3 9. As part of the submission the Landlord included supporting evidence indicating that the market rent of a 2-bedroom apartment ranged from £850-£975 per calendar month.
10. The tenant indicated in her opinion the market rent was between £560 and £600 per calendar month. No evidence was submitted in support of this assertion.
Determination and Valuation
11. Having considered the comparable evidence provided by the parties and of our own expert knowledge of rental values in the area, we consider that the open market rent for the property in good tenantable condition would be in the region of £800 per calendar month. From this level of rent we have made adjustments in relation to the nature of the property and the susceptibility to condensation issues which the Tribunal believes to and the tenant’s liability to redecorate.
12. The full valuation is shown below: Per Month
Market Rent
£800.00
Less a) Age/construction of the property relating to mould susceptibility and moisture ingress £40.00
£760.00
Decision
12. The Tribunal therefore determined that the rent at which the subject property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing Landlord under an assured tenancy was £760 per calendar month with effect from 28th March 2026.
Hardship
9. The Tenant raises hardship in their submissions. Accordingly, the Tribunal directs the new rent of £760 per calendar month is to take effect from 20th May 2026 this being the date of the Tribunal.
[NAME]:
Date: 20th May 2026
4
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.
5
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 188 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
[NAME] [NAME]
Landlord [NAME] [ADDRESS], Shirley, Solihull. [POSTCODE]
Tenant
1. The rent is: £760 Per calendar month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 20th May 2026
3. The amount included for services is/is not applicable
Per
4. Date assured tenancy commenced 29th July 2022
5. Length of the term or rental period 12 months
6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None
8. Description of premises Two bedroom ground floor apartment
[NAME] of Decision 20th May 2026
First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No.
BIR/00CQ/MNR/2026/0064
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Market Rent for Birmingham Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Coventry Apartment
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent at £1200 PCM
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £980 Per Month
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Fair Market Rent for HMO Bedroom
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Coventry Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Market Rent for Portsmouth Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Market Rent Due to Property Defects
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal sets fair rent of £618.75 pcm for Ipswich flat
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 landlord provided professional reports and a revocation notice confirming required works were completed.
- The tribunal considered its own expert knowledge of rental values in the area.
- The tribunal made an adjustment for the property's age and construction, which made it susceptible to mould.
- The new rent was delayed to take effect from the date of the Tribunal due to the tenant's hardship.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant's claim that the property was let with certain fixtures and fittings was not accepted for the current lease.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The market rent for a two-bedroom apartment in Coventry was determined at £760 per month.
Who was involved?
A tenant and their landlord were involved, with the First-tier Tribunal making the final decision.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court considered comparable evidence and expert knowledge to determine a fair market rent for the property.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988 were applied in this case.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The condition of the apartment and comparable rental values in the area were key arguments.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was partially for the tenant, setting a lower rent than proposed by the landlord but higher than requested by the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone facing a rent increase can seek a fair market determination through the First-tier Tribunal if they disagree with their landlord's proposal.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Written submissions, professional reports, and comparable rental data were important in making the decision.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, either party can apply for permission to appeal on a point 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.
