VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy. They considered the property's condition and market conditions to set the rent at £800 per month.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a rent determination that reflects the open market rate considering the property's condition and location.

Topics

rent determinationassured periodic tenancy

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable. The tribunal will determine the rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market, considering the property's condition and location.

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.11

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, section 11 implies a covenant by the lessor to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the dwelling house, including drains, gutters, and external pipes, as well as installations for water, gas, electricity, and sanitation. This obligation also extends to installations for space heating and heating water, provided the disrepair affects the lessee's enjoyment of the dwelling house.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal set a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on market conditions and the property's condition.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on the property's condition and market conditions. The decision took effect from 26 March 2021.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. CHI/29UG/MNR/2021/0029

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 21 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME] Miss [RESPONDENT] Mr [RESPONDENT]

Landlord [RESPONDENT] & [RESPONDENT] c/o Helen baker [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[APPELLANT] [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 800.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 26 March 2021

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

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 26 February 1996

5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs As per section 11 of the Landlord & [APPELLANT] 1985

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

8. Description of premises 3 Bedroom terrace house.

[NAME] of Decision 17 May 2021

1

Case Reference : CHI/29UG/MNR/2021/0029

Property : 21 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE].

Applicant: [redacted]

Respondent: [redacted]

(Landlords)

Representative : [COUNSEL] Solicitor

Date of Application : 12th March 2021

Type of Application : Sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988

Tribunal

: [NAME] Ms C D Barton MRICS Mr S Hodges FRICS

Date

: 17th May 2021

_______________________________________________

REASONS FOR DECISION ____________________________________

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2021 FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

Background 1. The Tribunal gave formal notice of its decision by a Notice dated 17th May 2021 in the sum of £800.00 per calendar month (pcm).

2. By an application received on 12th March 2021, the [APPELLANT] of the above property referred a notice of increase in rent served by the landlord under section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 to the Tribunal.

3. The landlord's notice dated the 1st February 2021 proposed a rent of £1,050.00 pcm. with effect from 26th March 2021, in place of the current rent of £700.00 pcm.

4. The tenancy is an assured shorthold tenancy which commenced on the 26th February 1996. The agreement is in standard form and in any event the tenancy is subject to the Landlord's repairing obligations defined in Section 11 the Landlord and [APPELLANT] 1985.

Property and Inspection 5. Following the Directions dated 12th April 2021 and the explanation contained therein, the Tribunal did not inspect the premises.

6. Extracting such information as it could from the papers supplied to the Tribunal by the parties, by reference to information publicly available on the internet and with the benefit of its knowledge and experience the Tribunal reached the following conclusions and found as follows:

7. The property is located on a busy road in a well established commercial and residential location.

8. The property comprises a double glazed centrally heated end terrace house.

9. The accommodation comprises: 2 reception rooms, kitchen, 3 bedrooms, bathroom and lean-to sunroom. Outside: gardens.

10. The property is let unfurnished with white goods and carpets provided by the [APPELLANT].

11. No specific information was provided to the Tribunal with regard to the supply of utilities. In the absence of any other information the Tribunal has assumed that mains, water, gas and electricity are connected.

Hearing 12. A hearing was not requested.

Documents supplied to and considered by the Tribunal

13. Tribunal Directions dated 12th April 2021.

14. Following the further Directions the following information was considered by the Tribunal:

3

15. [APPELLANT]: Application, Reply Form and Statement.

16. Landlord: Statement.

17. Tenancy Agreement and Notice of Increase.

Landlord's Representations 18. The Landlord says (in summary) that:

19. The last increase in rent was to £700.00 pcm with effect from 1st April 2009.

20. Since October 2020 the Landlords have carried out the following work: cut down tree, repaired footpath, replaced radiator, repaired bathroom and kitchen ceiling, fixed conservatory roof, replaced bathroom light and carried out electrical inspection.

21. The Landlord refers to a Best Price Guide prepared by their agent [COMPANY] which concludes that the property could achieve a rent of £1,150.00 to 1,250.00 pcm.

22. The proposed rent reflects the following: No increase since 2009, spacious accommodation and garden, no garage or off street parking, no modernisation since the kitchen in 2007, within walking distance of [NAME] and Northfleet Railway stations. Gravesend town centre is 5 minutes drive and Bluewater shopping centre 10 minutes drive.

[APPELLANT]'s Representations 23. The [APPELLANT] states (in summary ) that:

24. She has been a [APPELLANT] for 25 years.

25. The boiler was replaced in 2006 of the 10 radiators 6 are more than 25 years old.

26. Heating pipework to the lean-to runs across the doorway to the kitchen just above the floor level.

27. The kitchen units were replaced in 2006.

28. The third bedroom measures only 42 square feet (below the minimum guideline of 70 square feet).

29. The property is affected by football fans attending [NAME] football matches, is next to a motor bike repair shop, and a builders merchant and is on a very busy main road. There is a public house on the opposite side of the road.

30. The Landlord's comparable properties are not comparable. Besides the obvious difference in condition, they have 3 bedrooms, are situated on quiet roads and are not near commercial premises.

4

31. Repairs carried out by the [APPELLANT] include: back gate and fencing, tree maintenance, security light, drain cover, landscaping, kitchen safety light, faulty light and plug sockets replaced, repair bathroom ceiling and tiling, shower installed, replace bathroom taps, repair floor in bedroom 3, replace front gate and airbrick, ceiling fans installed, back door security lock repaired, pest control and mouse proofing.

32. The proposed rent is not a true reflection of the rental value. Taking into account the information the [APPELLANT] has provided the rent should be 20.00% less than that proposed i.e. £750.00 pcm.

The Tribunal’s Deliberations 33. The Tribunal may proceed to determine the rent at which it considers the subject property might reasonably be expected to let on the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy.

34. The Tribunal found as a matter of fact that the notice was a Notice under section 13 as prescribed by Statute.

35. The Tribunal is required to determine 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. The personal circumstances of the [APPELLANT] or Landlord are not relevant to this issue.

36. The Tribunal checked the [NAME] and noted that the subject property has a certificate expiring on 28th July 2028 with a Rating of D . The minimum level for legally letting a property is E.

37. Based on the knowledge of its members the Tribunal finds that the market for this type of property is very sensitive to condition and inventory. The subject property appears to the Tribunal to be in a generally satisfactory condition.

38. The Tribunal considered the evidence supplied by the Landlord and the [APPELLANT] and came to the following conclusions:

a) The works proposed to be carried out by the landlords are ignored for the purpose of determining the market rent with effect from 26th march 2021.

b) The Electrical Installation Condition Report (EICR) dated 7th October 2020 describes the electrics as satisfactory however it also highlights a number of issues which require attention.

c) A Gas Safety Report, dated 21st March 2021, indicates the system is safe to use although it does identify some issues.

39. In these circumstances in order to consider the matter within the terms of Rule 3 of The Tribunal Procedure (First -tier) (Property Chamber)

5

Rules 2013 the Tribunal relies on the experience and knowledge of its members.

40. After careful consideration of the current market conditions the Tribunal concluded that in good condition, but taking into account the disadvantaged location the current market rent would be £1000.00 pcm. However the Tribunal in this case considers deductions should be made to reflect the differences in the subject property and the market norm. In particular the tired internal condition, poor lean to, dated kitchen and bathroom, lack of white goods and floor coverings should be taken into account. The Tribunal therefore determined that following such deductions the market rent for the subject property is £800.00 pcm.

41. The rent will take effect from 26th March 2021 being the date specified by the landlord in the notice of increase.

Relevant Law 42. Sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988.

43. Assured Tenancies and Agricultural Occupancies (Forms) (England) Regulations 2015 (SI 2015 No.620)

RIGHTS OF APPEAL

1. A person wishing to appeal this decision (on a point of law only) to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) must seek permission to do so by making written application to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case. Where possible you should send your application for permission to appeal by email to [EMAIL] as this will enable the First-tier Tribunal Regional office to deal with it more efficiently.

2. The application must arrive at the Tribunal within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision.

3. If the person wishing to appeal does not comply with the 28 day time limit, the person shall include with the application for permission to appeal a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28 day time limit; the Tribunal will then decide whether to extend time or not to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed.

4. The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party making the application is seeking.

6

The Tribunal Procedure (First -tier) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013 Overriding objective and parties' obligation to co-operate with the Tribunal 3.-(1) The overriding objective of these Rules is to enable the Tribunal to deal with cases fairly and justly. (2) Dealing with a case fairly and justly includes- (a)dealing with the case in ways which are proportionate to the importance of the case, the complexity of the issues, the anticipated costs and the resources of the parties and of the Tribunal; (b)avoiding unnecessary formality and seeking flexibility in the proceedings; (c)ensuring, so far as practicable, that the parties are able to participate fully in the proceedings; (d)using any special expertise of the Tribunal effectively; and (e)avoiding delay, so far as compatible with proper consideration of the issues. (3) The Tribunal must seek to give effect to the overriding objective when it- (a)exercises any power under these Rules; or (b)interprets any rule or practice direction. (4) Parties must- (a)help the Tribunal to further the overriding objective; and (b)co-operate with the Tribunal generally.

📊 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 rent determination should reflect the open market rate.
  • The property's condition must be taken into account.
  • The property's location affects the open market value.
  • Tenants can challenge rent increases under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.
  • Rent should be assessed based on market comparables.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • Reasonable rent based on condition and market standards was not sufficient to overturn the decision.
  • Open market value alone without consideration of condition was insufficient.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

It set a new rent of £800 per month for an assured periodic tenancy.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the property's condition and market conditions.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 and the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The condition of the property and its location were the most important factors.

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

The decision was for the tenant.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should consider the condition of their property and market conditions when disputing rent.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence of the property's condition and comparable rents were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal.

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

It is recommended to get a solicitor for cases involving rent 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.