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

First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent at £750 PCM

Case No.

📌 In brief

A tenant applied to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) to determine a fair rental price. The Tribunal considered evidence about the property’s condition and similar properties in the area, setting the new rent at £750 per month from February 2026.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a determination of a market rent under sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988 based on comparable properties in good order.

Topics

tenancyrent control

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.13

This section applies to certain types of assured periodic tenancies, allowing landlords to serve a notice proposing an increase in rent. The notice must specify a new rent to take effect at the start of a new period, which cannot begin sooner than two months after the notice is served. There are additional conditions for different types of tenancies regarding when the new rent can take effect.

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 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 an assured tenancy, adjusting it from £800 pcm to £750 pcm due to property condition.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined a market rent of £750 pcm for an assured tenancy, adjusting from the landlord's proposed £800 pcm due to property condition and comparable rents.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed in Part

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Case Reference BIR/17UB/MDR/2025/0005

Property

[ADDRESS] Alfreton [POSTCODE]

Tenant

[COUNSEL]

Tenant’s Representative

None

Landlord

[COUNSEL]

Landlord’s [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Landlord’s Representative

None Date of Application 2 November 2025

Type of Application Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Members [NAME] – [NAME] of Decision

11 February 2026

Rent Determined

£750.00 per calendar month Date the new rent takes effect 11 February 2026

2

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

Background

1. The Landlord served a notice dated 7 November 2025 under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £800 per calendar month(pcm) in place of the existing rent of £575 pcm to take effect from 6 November 2025.

2. On 2 November 2025, 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 6 April 2023. The rental period is monthly.

Allocation of Repairs between Landlord and Tenant.

4. As per section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

Liability for Council Tax

5. The Tenant is responsible for the payment of Council Tax in respect of the Property.

6. The rent determined is exclusive of Council Tax.

Inspection/Hearing

7. Neither party requested an inspection or a hearing.

8. The Tribunal 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 terraced house and provides the following accommodation:

Internal: Living room, kitchen, bathroom, and 2 bedrooms.

Outside: Garden.

The Property benefits from central heating and double glazing. The Tenant has provided all the carpets and curtains and white goods.

3

Evidence

10. Both the Tenant and the Landlord returned the Tribunal’s Reply forms.

The Tenant

11. The Tenant submitted a form detailing the accommodation and alterations carried out.

12. The Tenant also submitted various photographs of the Property evidencing some areas of mould and damp to the walls and personal items. In addition, the Tenant submitted details of a terraced property on [ADDRESS] having 2 beds and 1 bathroom at £675pcm

13. The Tenant did also provide a copy of an undated letter sent to the Landlord rejecting the rental increase but offering to accept a 10% increase as he only earns the minimum wage and is unable to pay any more.

The Landlord

14. The Landlord similarly submitted details of the accommodation and a written statement provided by the Landlords representative.

15. In the statement the following comparable evidence was referred to:

[ADDRESS] – 2 bed mid-town house at £795pcm [ADDRESS] – 2 bed modern semi-detached house at £875pcm [ADDRESS] – 2 bed terraced house at £800pcm [ADDRESS] – 2 bed terraced house at £184.62 per week

16. The statement included various photographs and in the opinion of the agent the Property is in good condition and that there are no outstanding maintenance issues and the issues relating to damp are only minimal arising from poor ventilation and a lack of heating in the room and a hole in the ceiling beneath an upstairs radiator which was dripping and causing slight damage to an area of the kitchen flooring.

17. An email dated 27 November 2025 from [NAME] also sets out further evidence in this respect.

Determination and Valuation

18. The Tribunal had regard to the parties submissions and evidence and to its own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area.

4

19. The Tribunal considers that the market rental of the subject Property modernised and in good order would be in the order of £800pcm.

20. 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 other properties that are offered to let in the market.

21. The Tribunal found it necessary to make an adjustment for the condition of the Property compared to the evidence.

22. The Tribunals full valuation is shown below:

Starting Rent

£800.00pcm

Less Adjustments for condition

£50.00

Market rent

£750.00 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 made an application in this respect. The Tenant stated he struggled with monthly costs due to his limited income and the rental increase would therefore be unaffordable.

14. As a result of our decision the rent will increase by £175 per month. The date specified in the landlord’s notice was 6 November 2025 however given the Tenants financial circumstance the Tribunal sets the starting date for the new rent as at the date of the hearing being 11 February 2026.

Decision

15. Therefore, the Tribunal determines the market rent at £750 per calendar month with effect from 11 February 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

5

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 tenant is entitled to have their rent set based on comparable properties in good condition.
  • The tenant is entitled to have their rent determined by a tribunal if they dispute a landlord's proposed rent increase.
  • The tenant is entitled to have their rent adjusted according to the condition of the property and local rental values.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • A landlord's proposal for a new rent must be supported by reliable comparables and evidence of property condition to be justified.
  • A tenant's request for a rent adjustment is dismissed if the proposed new rent is not supported by relevant comparables and expert valuation.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal set a market rent of £750 pcm for an assured tenancy.

Who was involved?

A tenant and a landlord were involved in the dispute over rental price.

How did the court decide, and why?

The Tribunal considered evidence about property condition and comparable rents to set a fair market rent.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988 were used to determine the market rent.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The condition of the property compared to similar properties in good order influenced the decision.

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

The tenant's application was partially successful, with a lower rent than proposed by the landlord.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone can apply to the Tribunal if they disagree with their landlord’s proposed rent increase based on market conditions.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Photographs of property condition and comparable rental prices were important in the decision.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Either party can appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) if they disagree with the point 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.