VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Sets New Market Rent for Property

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on a new market rent for a property after considering comparable evidence and the condition of the property. The decision reflects the fair value of the property based on current market conditions.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent based on comparable evidence and the condition of the property.

Topics

tenancy disputesmarket rent determination

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.13

This section applies to certain types of periodic tenancies, allowing landlords to serve a notice proposing a new rent to take effect at the start of a new period. The new period must begin at least two months after the notice is served. Additionally, if the rent has been previously increased, the next increase can only occur after a specific time frame, which varies depending on the type of tenancy.

Housing Act 1988 s.14

A tenant under an assured tenancy can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy, provided that the rent is not pursuant to a previous determination under this section and more than six months have not elapsed since the beginning of the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the open-market rent based on various factors including the terms of the tenancy and any improvements made by the tenant.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal set a new market rent for a property based on comparable evidence and expert knowledge.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined a new market rent for a property based on comparable evidence and the condition of the property. The decision took into account the condition of the property and improvements made by the tenant.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

Case Reference

: BIR/00CN/MNR/2024/0623

Property : 25 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Tenant

: [APPELLANT] [NAME] [APPELLANT]

Landlord : [NAME], [ADDRESS], Swansea. [POSTCODE]

Landlord’s agent : N/A

Date of application : 1st October 2024

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

Tribunal Members : [NAME]. [NAME]. [NAME]. MRICS

Date of Decision : 13 March 2925

_______________________________________________

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £775.00 per month with effect from 5th October 2024 ____________________________________

S E C FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2 REASONS FOR THE DECISION Background

1. On 4th September 2024 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £775 per month in place of the existing rent of £675 per month to take effect from 5th October 2024.

2. On 1st October 2024, 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 the market rent.

Inspection

3. The Tribunal did not inspect the property but considered this case on the basis of the papers provided by the parties, information provided by parties during the video hearing on the 14th February 2025 and having regard to its own knowledge, expertise and online research.

Evidence

4. The Tribunal has considered the written submissions provided by the Tenant and Landlord together with information provided at the hearing.

The subject property is a second floor, centrally heated and double glazed 2- bedroom apartment with accommodation comprising living room, kitchen and bathroom together with a single parking space.

The Tribunal noted the inventory and schedule of condition dated 1 June 2023.

5. The Tribunal was informed by the Tenant that as outlined in the schedule of condition he had undertaken considerable remedial works to the property including replaced floor coverings, internal painting and other remediation works (receipts enclosed within the tribunal bundle) for which he had a verbal agreement with the Landlord that he would be reimbursed the cost of materials. It is further noted by the Tribunal that the white goods including cooker, washing machine and fridge freezer were provided by the Landlord.

6. Whilst no comparable evidence of open market lettings was included within the submissions both Landlord and Tenant referred to comparable property lettings in the hearing.

The Tenant indicated in the hearing that [ADDRESS] was let at £650 per calendar month from October 2023, [ADDRESS] had been let at £620 (however the tenant had moved out and the property was now on the open market for sale), and [ADDRESS] was let at £700 per calendar month but this

3 property had been recently refurbished and was offered fully furnished. Further, the Tenant provided the Tribunal with a computer links to the following adverts:

a. [ADDRESS] advertised at £650 per calendar month, b. [ADDRESS] advertised at £775 per calendar month but let at £750 c. [ADDRESS] advertised at £900 per calendar month, and d. Apartment advertised on Zoopla at £900 per calendar month

The Landlord in his evidence informed the Tribunal that [ADDRESS] had been let at £875 per calendar month unfurnished (computer link provided to the former advert), the local authority was now paying £750 per calendar month for one person accommodation and that the rent for [ADDRESS] had recently increased to £920 per calendar month from November 2024.

Further, the Landlord offered the opinion that there was a 5% increase in rental value when comparing a middle floor apartment to one on the top floor thus the subject property should attract a premium rent.

Determination and Valuation

7. Having taken into account the comparable evidence provided by the parties and our own expert knowledge of rental values in the area, we consider the most relevant comparable evidence to be [ADDRESS] followed by [ADDRESS]. In considering these comparable properties the Tribunal is of the opinion that the open market rent for the subject property in a good tenantable condition would be £820 per calendar month.

From this level of rent we have made adjustments in relation to:

a) The property condition b) Improvements carried out by the Tenant c) Curtains, carpets and white goods fitted by the Tenant d) The Tenant’s liability to redecorate.

8. The full valuation is shown below: Per month

Market Rent

£820

Less a) Items given under a) above

£20

b) Items given under b) above

£ 15 c) Items given under c) above

£ 5

4 d) Tenant’s internal decoration liability £ 5 £45

£45

Say £775

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 £775 per month with effect from 5th October 2024.

Chairman: [NAME]: 14th February 2025

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 25 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

[NAME]. [RESPONDENT]. [RESPONDENT] [NAME]. MRICS

Landlord [NAME] [ADDRESS], Swansea. [POSTCODE]

Tenant [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £775 Per month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is:

3. The amount included for services is not applicable

Per

4. Date assured tenancy commenced Verbal tenancy agreement 5. Length of the term or rental period N/a 6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Kitchen furniture and white goods including cooker, washing machine and fridge freezer.

8. Description of premises Second floor, centrally heated and double glazed 2-bedroom apartment with accommodation comprising living room, kitchen and bathroom together with single parking space

[NAME] of Decision 14th February 2025

First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No.

BIR/00CN/MNR/2024/0623

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 11 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 rent must be based on current market conditions.
  • The property's condition must be considered when setting the rent.
  • Rent proposals must be reasonable and supported by comparables.
  • Tenants' responsibilities under the Housing Act 1988 must be taken into account.
  • Expert knowledge of rental values in the area should inform the decision.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal set a new market rent for the property at £775 per month.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved in the dispute over the market rent.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on comparable evidence and the condition of the property, adjusting for improvements made by the tenant.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 sections 13 and 14 were applied to determine the market rent.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the comparable evidence of rents for similar properties in the area.

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

The decision was for the tenant, setting a lower rent than what the landlord proposed.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should gather comparable evidence and present any improvements made to the property to support their case.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Comparable evidence of rents for similar properties and documentation of improvements made to the property mattered.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, either party can apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal on any point of law arising from this decision.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving market rent determinations.

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.