VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal set a new monthly rent of £1,165 for an assured periodic tenancy. The decision was based on comparable rental values in the area and adjustments made due to the property’s specific conditions.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent adjusted for the specific conditions of their property under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.

Topics

rent determinationproperty valuation

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

This section allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine a fair market rent based on the open market conditions, taking into account the periods of the tenancy and any relevant improvements or reductions in the value of the property.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on comparable evidence and adjustments for property condition.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal determined a fair market rent of £1,165 per month for an assured periodic tenancy after considering comparable evidence and making adjustments for the property's condition.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. HAV/45UHMNR/2025/0609

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 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

[NAME] Mr [RESPONDENT]

Landlord Mr [RESPONDENT] 14 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Mr [APPELLANT] [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 1,165.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 9 February 2025

3. The amount included for services is not applicable n/a Per n/a

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 9 July 2012

5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord

8. Description of premises First floor 2-bedrom flat within a modern purpose built block, with garage.

[NAME] of Decision 20 August 2025

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : HAV/45UH/MNR/2025/0609 Property : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant Tenant : Mr [COUNSEL] :

None

Respondent Landlord : Mr [COUNSEL] : None Type of Application :

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

Tribunal Members : Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] of Application : 14th January 2025 Date of Decision : 20th August 2025

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £1,165 per calendar month with effect from 9th February 2025.

HAV/45UH/MNR/2025/0609

SUMMARY REASONS

Background 1. On 2nd January 2025 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,200 per month in place of the existing rent of £925 per month to take effect from 9th February 2025.

2. On 14th January 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. A number of procedural issues ensued with final Directions being issued by the Tribunal on 23rd July 2025 Inspection 4. The Tribunal did not inspect the property but considered this case based on the papers provided by the parties and information freely available on the internet. Evidence

5. The Tribunal has considered the written submissions provided by the Tenant and the Landlord. Determination and Valuation 6. Having given consideration to the comparable evidence provided by the parties and of its own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, the Tribunal determines that the open market rent for the property in good tenantable condition would be £1,300 per calendar month.

7. Such a tenancy would normally include white goods, carpets, curtains/blinds and associated fittings to all be provided by the Landlord.

8. In this case the property is not let in such condition or with white goods, carpets and curtains all supplied so some adjustments to the ‘open market rent’ are necessary. In particular the Tribunal has made the adjustments for the Tenant’s provision of carpets and some white goods, some damp and resultant black mould, the condition of some carpets and other general wants of repair.

9. The full valuation is shown below: Full open market rent in good condition £1,300 Less deductions for:- Tenants’ provision of white goods

£20 Tenant’s provision of curtains

£15

HAV/45UH/MNR/2025/0609

Internal damp and mould

£20 Condition of carpets

£30 General wants of repair

£50

____ TOTAL Deductions per Month

£135

_____ RENT PAYABLE PER MONTH

£1,165

10. The Tribunal therefore decided that the rent at which the subject property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing Landlord under the terms of this assured tenancy and in its present condition was £1,165 per month.

11. The Tenant made no representation that the starting date for the new rent specified in the Landlord’s notice would cause the Tenant undue hardship.

12.

Accordingly, the Tribunal directed that the new rent of £1,165 per month should take effect from 9th February 2025 this being the date specified in the notice. APPEAL PROVISIONS

These summary reasons are provided to give the parties an indication as to how the Tribunal made its decision. If either party wishes to appeal this decision, they should first make a request for full reasons and the details of how to appeal will be set out in the full reasons. Any request for full reasons should be made within a month. Any subsequent application for permission to appeal should be made on Form RP PTA.

📊 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 a market rent of £1,300 per month for the property in good tenantable condition.
  • The tenant's provision of white goods reduced the rent by £20.
  • The tenant's provision of curtains reduced the rent by £15.
  • The internal damp and mould in the property reduced the rent by £20.
  • The condition of the carpets in the property reduced the rent by £30.
  • General wants of repair in the property reduced the rent by £50.

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 rent of £1,165 per month for an assured periodic tenancy.

Who was involved?

A tenant and their landlord were involved in the dispute over rent determination.

How did the court decide, and why?

The Tribunal considered comparable rental values and adjusted the rent based on the property's condition.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Housing Act 1988 sections 13 and 14 were applied to determine a fair market rent.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The Tribunal focused on comparable rental values and property condition adjustments.

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

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

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone facing a rent increase can seek a fair market valuation and adjust it based on their property's condition.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Comparable rental values, property condition reports, and written submissions from both parties were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, either party can appeal the decision within a month for full reasons and then apply for permission to appeal.

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

It is advisable to consult with a qualified solicitor for specific advice on your situation.

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.