VadeLab
Allowed in PartFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent in Assured Tenancy Dispute

Case No.

📌 In brief

In this case, the First-tier Tribunal set the fair market rent for an assured tenancy dispute. The tribunal considered both the landlord's proposal to raise the rent significantly and the tenant's argument that such a large increase would cause undue hardship.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to have their rent set at a fair market rate when challenged by a landlord's notice under Section 13 of the Housing Act 1988.

Topics

tenancy disputesrent determination

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.13

This section allows landlords to serve a notice proposing an increase in rent for an assured periodic tenancy, provided the notice is in the prescribed form and specifies a new period for the tenancy. The new rent can take effect at the start of the new period specified in the notice, subject to certain conditions regarding the timing of the increase.

Housing Act 1988 s.14

A tenant under an assured tenancy can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the rent at which the property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under similar conditions.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured tenancy after considering the landlord's proposed increase and the tenant's hardship.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined the market rent for an assured tenancy at £600 pcm, taking into account a landlord's proposed increase of £2,000 pcm and the tenant's financial hardship.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed in Part

© CROWN COPYRIGHT FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference MAN/00BR/MNR/2026/0205 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Tenant [NAME] Tenant’s Representative Landlord [APPELLANT] Landlord’s Address 252 upper Chorlton rd. Old Trafford, Manchester, [POSTCODE], United Kingdom Landlord’s Representative Versus law solicitors Date of Application 12 April 2026 Type of Application Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Members [NAME] – [NAME] of Decision 6 June 2026 Rent Determined £600.00 per calendar month Date the new rent takes effect 1 July 2026

2

REASONS FOR THE

DECISION Background 1. On 30 March 2026, the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £2,000.00 per calendar month(pcm) in place of the existing rent of £525.00 pcm to take effect from 1 May 2026.

2. On 12 April 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 24 August 2026 for an initial term of six months. 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. Property is a fully furnished room, and the following are included within the rental amount: Water Charges Gas Broadband Electricity Liability for Council Tax 6. The Landlord is responsible for the payment of Council Tax in respect of the Property. The rent determined is inclusive of Council Tax. Any other terms of the tenancy taken into consideration in determining the rent.

7. None.

3 Inspection/Hearing 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 fully furnished room within a HMO situated on the first floor of a converted terrace house, offering the following accommodation: One bedroom Shared Kitchen Bathroom It Appears the Property benefits from double glazing, limited evidence is provided as to how the property is heated. The Property is situated in the North Salford area within close proximity of amenities. Manchester City Centre is approximately 2.25 mile to the south east. Evidence 10. Both the Landlord the Tenant returned the Tribunal’s Reply forms. The Landlord 11. The landlord at 2.4 of the form agreed with the Tenant’s proposal.

12. The Landlord did not complete 2.5 nor supplied any evidence to support the rent proposed in the s.13 notice. The Tenant.

13. The Tenant noted, at 2.1, the Landlord’s agreement. Determination and Valuation 14. In light of the parties agreeing the Tribunal sets the Market rent as follows:

4 Market rent £600.00 pcm Undue hardship 12. 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. In cases of undue hardship, the Tribunal has a discretion to fix a later starting date up to the date a Tribunal makes its determination.

13. The Tenant has asked the Tribunal to fix a later starting date in this case.

14. They say an increase in rent would cause financial difficulty, particularly if applied from an earlier date, as I budget based on my current rent and would not be able to cover any backdated increase.

15. The Landlord did not respond to the Tenant’s application for postponement due to hardship.

16. As a result of our decision the rent will increase by £75 per month. The date specified in the landlord’s notice was 1 May 2026. On the basis of the evidence supplied by the Tenant, the Tribunal considers that for the increase to take effect from the date in the Landlord’s Notice would cause undue hardship and accordingly sets the starting date for the new rent as 1 July 2026. Decision 17. Therefore, the Tribunal determines the market rent at £600.00 per calendar month with effect from 1 July 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:

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

  • A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent based on local comparables and the condition of their accommodation.|A tenant is entitled to have their rent set at a fair market rate by the First-tier Tribunal when faced with an unreasonable rent increase notice from the landlord.|A tenant is entitled to a fair determination of market rent under sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988 when faced with a proposed increase by the landlord.|A tenant is entitled to have the market rent adjusted based on the condition of the property and any ongoing issues affecting its use.|A tenant is entitled to have a new rent 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

  • A tenant is entitled to have their rent set at the market rate based on comparable properties within the same area.

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 the market rent at £600 pcm for an assured tenancy dispute.

Who was involved?

A tenant and a landlord were in dispute over the rental amount of a furnished room within a HMO.

How did the court decide, and why?

The tribunal decided based on evidence submitted by both parties and their agreement to set the rent at £600 pcm, considering financial hardship for the tenant.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988 were applied in determining the market rent.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The tenant's argument about financial hardship due to a significant rent increase was crucial.

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

The decision was partially in favour of the tenant, setting a lower rent than proposed by the landlord.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone facing a significant rent increase can argue financial hardship to have the rent set at a fair market rate.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence of current and proposed rental amounts, as well as proof of financial hardship, were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, either party can appeal on a point of law to the Upper Tribunal 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 disputes.

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.