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

First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent for Bristol Flat

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal set a new rent for a flat in Bristol after considering similar rental properties and the current state of the flat, such as its heating system and windows.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord must consider the condition of the property and relevant comparables when proposing a new rent under Section 13 of the Housing Act 1988.

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.13

This section applies to certain types of assured tenancies, allowing landlords to serve a notice proposing a new rent to take effect at the start of a new period of the tenancy. The new rent can only take effect if it starts at least two months after the notice is served. For non-yearly tenancies, the earliest the new rent can take effect is 52 weeks after the start of the current tenancy period.

Housing Act 1988 s.14

A tenant under an assured tenancy can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy if the rent is proposed in a notice under section 13. The tribunal will determine the rent at which the dwelling house might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under similar conditions to the existing tenancy.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured tenancy in Bristol, considering comparable lettings and property conditions.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined the market rent for an assured tenancy in a Grade II listed property in Bristol. The Tribunal considered comparable lettings and the condition of the property, including heating and double glazing.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed in Part

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Case Reference

HAV/ 00HB/ MNR/2026/0003

[ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenants

Mr [COUNSEL] and Miss H [COUNSEL]

Tenants’ Representative

None

Landlord

Mr [COUNSEL]

Landlord’s Address

C/o [RESPONDENT], [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Landlord’s Representative

Mr [COUNSEL] of Application

30 December 2025

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

Tribunal Members [NAME] – [NAME] [NAME] of Decision

26 February 2026

Rent Determined

£1,260.00 per Calendar Month

Date the new rent takes effect

8 January 2026

2

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

Background

1. On 2 December 2025, the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,347.50 per calendar month (pcm) in place of the existing rent of £1,225.00 pcm to take effect from 8 January 2026.

2. On 30 December 2025, under Section 13(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988, Mr [RESPONDENT] referred the Landlord’s notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal for determination of a market rent.

3. The assured tenancy commenced on 8 January 2025 for a term of twelve months. The rental period is monthly.

Allocation of Repairs between Landlord and Tenants.

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 [NAME] specified below) and the costs relating to the same.

5. Mr [NAME] has confirmed neither furniture nor any services are provided under the tenancy.

Liability for Council Tax

6. The tenants are 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. The tenants are required to keep the property including all the landlord’s machinery and equipment clean and tidy and in good and tenantable condition, repair and decorative order, (reasonable wear and tear, items which the landlord is responsible to maintain, and damage for which the landlord has agreed to insure, excepted).

3

Inspection/Hearing

8. Neither party requested an oral hearing. The Tribunal has considered this case on the bases of the papers provided by the parties, having viewed the property on the internet and its own knowledge and specialist expertise.

The Property

9. [ADDRESS] is a conversion/reconstruction into flats from early 19th century townhouses with a carriage arch, in late Georgian style. It is built on ground and two upper floors and is Grade II listed. The property is a ground floor flat offering the following accommodation:

Entrance hall/lobby, reception room with open plan kitchen, two bedrooms and one bathroom/WC.

From the information provided the property benefits from heating by electric night storage heaters, carpet and curtains.

[ADDRESS] lies to west of [ADDRESS]/[ADDRESS], relatively close to Bristol bus and coach station in the Kingsdown and Stokes Croft areas of the city.

Evidence

10. Mr [RESPONDENT], on behalf of the landlord, has returned the Tribunal’s Reply form. Mr [RESPONDENT] has given some information in his application.

The Tenant.

11. Under ‘Repairs’ in his application Mr [APPELLANT] says the landlord is responsible for ‘Black mould, heaters, electrics, water storage heater, oven, dry/wet rot, wood boring insect infestations, structural damage.’ Then he goes on to say the tenants are responsible for cosmetic damage and broken glass.

12. Mr [NAME] has not provided any rental evidence to assist the Tribunal.

On behalf of the Landlord, Mr [RESPONDENT] of [RESPONDENT] has given submissions.

13. In his replies, Mr [NAME] has provided a floor plan of the property to confirm the layout and accommodation of the flat. Mr [NAME] says heating is provided by electric night storage heaters, there is no double glazing and that carpets and curtains are provided by the landlord. Of the [NAME], a refrigerator and a cooker have been provided too. Mr [NAME] confirms there is off-street parking.

4

14. Under ‘Improvements’, Mr [NAME] says not applicable as the property is Grade II listed. Service charges are not applicable too. Under Disrepairs/Defects Mr [NAME] outlines issues reported with the heating and hot water. From the information provided, all the items identified have been resolved. Under ‘Any Other Comments’ Mr [NAME] says the flat is within walking distance from the city centre, King’s [ADDRESS], the bus station and local bus services.

15. Mr [NAME] has provided the Tribunal with a copy of the ‘Move In/Out Inspection’ for the property dated 8 January 2025. The document has various photographs which indicate the general condition of the property and includes the kitchen and bathroom/WC equipment and appliances.

16. Mr [NAME] has provided a Best Price Guide of nine, two-bedroom, lettings’ comparables in the vicinity. The rental values range from £1,350 per calendar month up to £1,550 per calendar month, with a date range from October 2024 to January 2026.

17. In addition, Mr [NAME] has provided two comparable lettings within [ADDRESS], briefly as follows:

a) [ADDRESS] – an identical two-bedroom flat let in March 2025 for £1,250 per calendar month.

b) [ADDRESS] – a one-bedroom flat let in January 2026 for £1,050 per calendar month.

Determination and Valuation

18. The Tribunal considers the comparable lettings provided by Mr [NAME] to be relevant in this matter to determine the market rent. In particular, the two comparable lettings in the subject building. Mr [NAME] neither goes on to give his assessment of the rental value of the property, nor does he reference any adjustments that might be applicable to meet these circumstances.

19. Relying on its own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, and the comparables provided by the Landlord, the Tribunal considers that the market rental of the subject Property modernised and in good order would be in the order of £1,350 per calendar month. 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 central heating, double glazing, [NAME] and curtains provided by the landlord.

5

20. From the information provided by the parties the Tribunal has concluded adjustments from the market rent are required to reflect the following: (a) there is no central heating, (b) there is no double glazing, and (c) of the [NAME], a washing machine has not been provided by the landlord.

21. The Tribunal’s rental valuation with adjustments is as follows:

Market Rent

£1,350.00 pcm

Less a) No central heating

£50.00 b) No double glazing

£25.00

c) No washing machine

£15.00 £90.00

Market rent

£1,260.00 pcm

Undue hardship

12. Mr [NAME] has not given any submission to the Tribunal that the starting date the new rent specified in the Notice would cause the tenants hardship.

13. As a result of our decision the rent will increase by £35 per Calendar Month. The date specified in the landlord’s notice is 8 January 2026.

Decision

14. Therefore, the Tribunal determines the market rent at £1,260.00 per Calendar Month with effect from 8 January 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 landlord's comparable lettings were relevant for determining the market rent.
  • The landlord did not provide a washing machine, which reduced the market rent.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The tenant did not submit that the new rent's start date would cause hardship.

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 based on comparable lettings and property conditions.

Who was involved?

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

How did the court decide, and why?

The tribunal decided by considering similar rental properties and adjusting for differences like heating and windows.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Section 13 and Section 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, including heating and windows, influenced the final rental price.

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

The tenant's proposed rent was not accepted; a new market-based rent was set.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone facing a rent increase should gather evidence of comparable rental prices and property conditions.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Comparable lettings, property condition reports, and heating details were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, either party can appeal the decision to the Upper Tribunal 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.