First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Four-Bedroom House
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal set the fair market rent for a four-bedroom property in Ilford at £3,300 per month. The decision was based on an inspection of the property and comparisons with similar houses in the area.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to have their rent set at a fair market rate based on comparable properties and the condition of the premises.
📖 What the law says
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. However, the application cannot be made if the rent is already set by a previous determination under this section or if more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy. Additionally, tenants can also challenge a new rent proposed in a notice under sections 13(2) or 13A(2). When determining the rent, the tribunal considers what a willing landlord would charge for a similar property in the open market, taking into account the condition of the property 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 four-bedroom property in Ilford, Essex.
📜 Headnote Official document
The tribunal determined that a four-bedroom house in Ilford, Essex should have a market rent of £3,300 per month (inclusive of council tax) based on comparable properties and the condition of the premises.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Dismissed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. TR/LON/00BC/MNR/2023/0305
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 5 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Judge Tagliavini Mr J Naylor FRICS FRIRPM
Landlord [NAME] 110 [ADDRESS] , [POSTCODE]
Tenant Mr [APPELLANT]
1. The rent is: £ 3300.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 12 July 2023
*3. The amount included for council tax is £201.23 Per month
*4. Service charges are variable and are not included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 12 April 2021
6. Length of the term or rental period 12 months
7. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord liable for s.11 L&T 1985 repairs
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None
9. Description of premises 4 bedroom extended semi-detached house with upstairs dressing room/study and access to loft. Ground floor entrance hall, through reception, kitchen/dining room, study and downstairs w.c. Front drive providing off street parking for 1 or 2 cars. Rear garden with BBQ area and pool and pool room (currently out of commission).
Chairman Judge Tagliavini Date of Decision 3 November 2023
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2020
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00BC/MNR/2023/0305 Tenant : Mr [APPELLANT] Landlord : Mr [APPELLANT] : 5 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of Statement of Reasons for decision dated 3 November 2023 : 13 November 2023
STATEMENT OF REASONS ON AN [NAME] FOR DETERMINATION OF A MARKET RENT UNDER S. 13 AND 14 OF THE HOUSING ACT 1988.
2 Background
1. The Tribunal has received an [NAME] from the tenant, referring a Notice of Increase in Rent. The [NAME] is made under sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988 (the 1988 Act).
2. By a section 13 Housing Act 1988 landlord’s notice proposing a rent increase, dated 08/06/2023 the respondent landlord sought to increase the rent from £2,382.00 (inclusive of council tax) to £3,600 per month inclusive of council tax) with effect from 12th July 2023.
3. The applicant is the assured shorthold tenant under an agreement dated 10/04/2021 for a period of 12 months with effect from 12/04/2021 at a rent of £2,382.00 (inclusive of council tax).
4. The subject property is an extended semi-detached house that was advertised as having four bedrooms on the first floor with upstairs dressing room/study and access to the loft, with a fifth bedroom on the ground floor through lounge and a large kitchen and dining area with downstairs w.c. and front and rear garden areas.
The hearing
5. Both parties attended the hearing in person. The applicant tenant asserted the market rent for the subject property should be no more than £2,500 per month (inclusive of council tax) as the property was effectively a four bedroom property as the upstairs room used as a dressing room was too small to accommodate even a single bed and the local authority had forbidden the use of the loft space being used as bedroom or for any other than storage. The applicant also sought to rely on a number of comparable four bedroom properties in the Barking, Seven King and IG6 areas to substantiate his arguments for a lower rent than that proposed by the landlord. The applicant also accepted there were no issues with disrepair.
6. In his objections to the [NAME], the respondent landlord told the tribunal the property had been advertised as a five-bedroom property. Although, the fifth bedroom was small, the local authority has not forbidden its use as a bedroom although he agreed the loft area was prohibited by the local authority to be used in this way. The respondent also relied upon a number of comparable properties, which he said, that unlike the applicant’s comparable properties were situated in the local IG3 area. Further, the rent he charged included council tax which had risen from £182.00 per month to £201.23 per month. The landlord confirmed he was not seeking to rely upon any tenant misuse of the property.
para 10 line 6 determined that a rent para 11 line three' thee 'should it be 'the '
3
Inspection
7. The tribunal carried out an inspection of the subject property and found it to be a reasonably maintained 1930’s extended semi-detached house with parking for 2 cars in the front garden area and a large rear garden with decommissioned pool and pool/changing room and a BBQ area. The tribunal found the 5th first floor bedroom could not be reasonably used as a bedroom and the ground floor room, current being used as storage, was more properly suited to be used as study in light of the absence of windows and its position on the ground floor by the front door.
The tribunal’s reasons for its decision dated 3 November 2023
8. Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988 states:
(1)Where, under subsection (4)(a) of section 13 above, a tenant refers to the appropriate tribunal a notice under subsection (2) of that section, the appropriate tribunal shall determine the rent at which, subject to subsections (2) and (4) below, the appropriate 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 [NAME] 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;
4 (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 [NAME], at least one of them) did not quit.
9. The tribunal found the 5th first floor bedroom could not be reasonably used as a bedroom and the ground floor room, current being used as storage, was more properly suited to be used as study in light of the absence of windows and its position on the ground floor by the front door. The tribunal attributed no value to the decommissioned pool, pool/changing room and BBQ area.
10. The tribunal found there were no improvements that were required to be disregarded, although the tenant had carried out some redecoration. Similarly, the tribunal did not find the property suffered from any significant disrepair or anything other than fair wear and tear and therefore, determined the subject property was largely in good order.
5
11. The tribunal finds the subject property is properly and accurately described as a four bedroom house with an upstairs study/dressing room and downstairs study. The tribunal also found the respondent’s comparable properties were of more assistance than those relied upon by the applicant. Further having regard to the £201.23 per month attributable to council tax, the tribunal determined a rent of £3,300 per month (inclusive of council tax) accurately reflected the market rent for a four bedroom house in the IG3 area and the subject property.
12. As neither party sought to assert the start date of the rent should be any other than the date proposed in the Notice of Increase, the tribunal determined the increase would take effect on the date proposed i.e., 12th July 2023.
Name: Judge Tagliavini
Date: 13 November 2023
Rights of appeal
By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, the Tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may have. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), then a written [NAME] for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional Office which has been dealing with the case. The [NAME] should be made on Form RP PTA available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-rp-pta-[NAME]-for- permission-to-appeal-a-decision-to-the-upper-tribunal-lands-chamber The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the Regional Office within 28 days after the Tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the [NAME]. If the [NAME] is not made within the 28-day time limit, such [NAME] must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28-day time limit; the Tribunal will then look at such reason(s) and decide whether to allow the [NAME] for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates (i.e. give the date, the property and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking. Please note that if you are seeking permission to appeal against a decision made by the Tribunal under the Rent Act 1977, the Housing Act
6 1988 or the Local Government and Housing Act 1989, this can only be on a point of law. If the Tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further [NAME] for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent at £2,200 per Month
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Semi-Detached House
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Market Rent for Portsmouth Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal sets fair market rent for assured periodic tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Coventry Apartment
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 rent is set based on comparable properties in the area.
- The rent reflects the fair market rate based on the property's condition.
- The rent is adjusted according to expert knowledge of the market value.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The rent determination does not consider the condition of the rented property.
- The rent is not set based on comparable properties and local conditions.
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 a four-bedroom house in Ilford at £3,300 per month.
Who was involved?
A tenant and a landlord were involved in the dispute over the rental price of a property.
How did the court decide, and why?
The tribunal inspected the property and compared it with similar houses to determine a fair market rent.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Housing Act 1988 section 14 was used to set the rental price.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The tribunal considered comparable properties and the condition of the property when setting the rent.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the tenant, as they sought a lower rent than what was determined by the tribunal.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone facing a rental dispute should gather evidence on comparable properties and the condition of their property to support their case.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The inspection report and comparable rent data were crucial in determining the market value.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, an application for permission to appeal must be made within 28 days of receiving the tribunal's reasons.
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.
