VadeLab
DismissedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Sets New Market Rent for Assured Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

In a case involving an assured tenancy, the First-tier Tribunal set a new market rent of £775 per month after considering both parties' submissions. The decision reflects current rental values in the area.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord may propose and a tribunal may determine a new rent for an assured tenancy based on market conditions, subject to statutory provisions.

Topics

rent determinationhousing acttribunal decision

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.13

This section allows landlords to propose an increase in rent for assured periodic tenancies, excluding relevant low-cost tenancies. Landlords can serve a notice proposing a new rent to take effect at the start of a new period, which must begin at least two months after the notice is served. The new rent can be challenged by the tenant through an application to the appropriate tribunal.

Housing Act 1988 s.14

This section permits tenants under assured tenancies to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the open-market rent, considering factors like the periods of the tenancy and the terms of the agreement, excluding the amount of rent.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured tenancy under Section 13 of the Housing Act 1988.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined the market rent for an assured tenancy under Section 13 of the Housing Act 1988, setting it at £775 pcm based on evidence and expert knowledge.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Dismissed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference MAN/30UH/MNR/2026/0071 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] [NAME] Tenant’s [ADDRESS] for [APPELLANT] Landlord’s Address c/o [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Landlord’s Representative Touchstone CPS Date of Application 18 February 2026 Type of Application Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Members [NAME] – [NAME] of Decision 28 May 2026 Rent Determined £775.00 per calendar month Date the new rent takes effect 01 April 2026

2

REASONS FOR THE

DECISION Background 1. On 23 February 2026, the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £775.00 per calendar month(pcm) in place of the existing rent of £725.00 pcm to take effect from 01 April 2026. This was the second notice served, a previous one having proposed a new rent of £825.00 pcm.

2. On 18 February 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 01 April 2022 for a term of 12 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. Front lawn mowed once per month. Cost included in rent. 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. 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 Tribunal did not inspect the Property.

10. The Property is a ground floor flat forming part of a modern three storey development, offering the following accommodation: Living Room, Kitchen, two bedrooms and bathroom with full suite including shower. Outside: Garden. The Property is situated within the centre of Heysham within close proximity of amenities.

3 Evidence 11. Both the Tenant and the Landlord returned the Tribunal’s Reply forms. The Tenant.

12. The Tenant made the following comments: a) The Tenant confirmed that they often undertake repairs themselves due to the time it takes to get repairs done and that the standard of repairs undertaken was shoddy. b) The Tenant queried whether the recent rent cap for social housing should apply given that the Landlord is a Registered Housing Provider. c) The Tenant at his own expense has replaced the patio door handles.

13. In terms of rental evidence, the Tenant commented that rents across the estate vary quite greatly, but did not produce any specific evidence. They did note a newly refurbished 4 bedroom house was available for £950 pcm, only £125 pcm more than the initial suggested rent of £825 pcm. The Landlord 14. The Landlord simply noted that the rent review notice had been resubmitted to the Tenant for a rent of £775 pcm, down from £825 pcm in the original notice. No further evidence was provided. Determination and Valuation 15. Relying on its own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area the Tribunal considers that the market rental of the subject Property modernised and in good order would be in the order of £775.00 pcm. This is the rent we would expect the property to let for in the open market if it was in the same general condition as the comparable properties including having white goods and curtains provided by the landlord.

16. No evidence was provided that any adjustments needed to be made to the rent. Market rent £775.00 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. He says he will otherwise be caused undue hardship because he self funds his rent from his salary as sole earner and receives no benefits. However, he provides no evidence of level of earnings and other assets.

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

4 15. As a result of our decision the rent will increase by £50 a month. The date specified in the landlord’s notice was 01 April 2026. On the basis that no evidence was supplied by the Tenant, the Tribunal has no reason to delay the effective date. Decision 16. Therefore, the Tribunal determines the market rent at £775.00 per calendar month with effect from 01 April 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

  • The tribunal determined the market rent based on its own expert knowledge of rental values in the area.
  • The tribunal found the market rental for a modernised property in good order would be £775.00 per calendar month.
  • The new rent takes effect from the date specified in the landlord's notice because the tenant provided no evidence of undue hardship.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The tenant's query about a social housing rent cap applying to the landlord was not accepted.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The tribunal determined the market rent for an assured tenancy at £775 pcm.

Who was involved?

A tenant and a landlord, with the tenant objecting to the proposed rent increase.

How did the court decide, and why?

The tribunal considered evidence from both parties and set the rent based on market conditions in the area.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Housing Act 1988 sections 13 and 14.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The tribunal relied on its knowledge of rental values to determine the rent.

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

Against, as the proposed rent increase was upheld.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone facing a rent review should gather evidence on local rental values to support their position.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Both parties submitted forms and comments regarding the property's condition and market rents.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, an appeal can be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on points of law.

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.

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.