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

First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rental Rate for Bury Property

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) reviewed a proposed rent increase for a tenant's home in Bury. After evaluating the evidence provided by both parties, including improvements made to the property and local rental prices, the tribunal set a new market rent of £377.53 per fortnight.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to have their proposed new rent assessed by a tribunal under sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988.

Topics

tenancy disputesrent assessmenthousing act

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 a new rent to take effect at the start of a new period of the tenancy. The new period must begin at least two months after the notice is served. Additionally, if the rent has been previously increased, the new period must align with specific dates related to the previous increases.

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 relevant improvements.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured tenancy property in Bury, considering local rental evidence and adjustments.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) assessed a proposed rent increase under sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988, considering local rental evidence and adjustments. The tribunal determined a new market rent for an assured tenancy property in Bury.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed in Part

© CROWN COPYRIGHT FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference MAN/00BM/MNR/2026/0085 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Tenant [NAME] Tenant’s Representative Landlord [APPELLANT] Landlord’s Address Suite 7.1, 8 Exchange Quay, Salford [POSTCODE] Landlord’s [COUNSEL] [NAME] of Application 25 February 2026 Type of Application Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Members [NAME] – [NAME] of Decision 28 May 2026 Rent Determined £377.53 per fortnight Date the new rent takes effect 07 March 2026

2

REASONS FOR THE

DECISION Background 1. On 08 January 2026, the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £393.23 per fortnight in place of the existing rent of £357.69 per fortnight to take effect from 07 March 2026.

2. On 25 February 2026, 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 17 August 1996 and was periodic from the beginning. The rental period is fortnightly. Allocation of Repairs between Landlord and Tenant.

4. As per section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. Services Charges or furniture provided by Landlord (other than carpets and curtains and white goods specified below) and the costs relating to the same.

5. None Liability for Council Tax 6. The Tenant is 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. None Inspection/Hearing 8. Neither party requested an oral hearing. The Tribunal has considered this case on the basis of the papers provided by the parties and its own knowledge and specialist expertise. The Property 9. The Tribunal did not inspect the Property.

10. The Property is a three bedroom, semi-detached house offering the following accommodation: Hall, living room, kitchen, three bedrooms and bathroom with full suite including shower. Outside: Garden to front and rear. The Property benefits from gas central heating and double glazing.

3 The Property is situated within the Warth area of Bury, approximately 1.5 miles south of Bury town centre. Evidence 11. Both the Tenant and the Landlord returned the Tribunal’s Reply forms. The Tenant.

12. The Tenant made the following comments: a) The Tenant noted that they had made the following improvements to the Property: replastered the living room, hall, stairs, landing and kitchen; replace the front door with a uPVC one; installed a fitted kitchen; installed a new bathroom suite; fully landscaped the front and rear gardens, including fencing. The Landlord did not challenge this detail. b) There are areas of damp within the Property, that they are still waiting for the Landlord to resolve. c) They are in dispute with the Landlord, owing to the chimney being blocked during recent external works. They want the chimney and gas fire re-instating. d) They made reference to an agreement between the Landlord and local council to keep rent increase in line with those of Local Housing Authority properties, but provided no evidence.

13. In terms of rental evidence, they referred to two local properties being rented at £660 pcm and £760 pcm, (but provided no further detail) and provided the details from the “Zoopla” online portal for one two bedroom terrace property at £750 pcm and from the “Rightmove” online portal for another terraced property of unknown size at £795 pcm. The Landlord 14. The Landlord made the following comments: a) The Landlord noted that they had sent a considerable sum recently in improvements to the structure of the Property, including a full re-roof.

15. The Landlord provided no comparable evidence of local rents. Determination and Valuation 16. The limited comparable evidence provided by the Tenant is lacking in detail, and the Tribunal considered the two properties from the online portals not to be significant comparables, given their size, configuration and desirability.

17. Relying on its own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area the Tribunal considers that the market rental of the subject Property modernised and in good order would be in the order of £878.00 pcm. 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 comparable properties including having white goods and curtains provided by the landlord.

18. From this level of rent, the Tribunal has made adjustments in relation to the following:

4 a) Improvements and fittings provided by the Tenant – fitted kitchen and bathroom. b) Improvements and fittings provided by the Tenant – provision fittings including white goods and curtains. The full valuation is shown below: Starting Rent £878.00 pcm Less a) Items given under b) above £50.00 b) Items given under c) above £10.00 £60.00 Market rent £818.00 pcm (£377.53 per fortnight) 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 has asked the Tribunal to fix a later starting date in this case, citing the ill health of their partner, resulting in only the Tenant earning a wage. However, they did not provide any evidence to support this assertion.

14. The Landlord did not respond to the Tenant’s application for postponement due to hardship.

15. As a result of our decision, the rent will decrease by £19.84 a month. The date specified in the landlord’s notice was 07 March 2026. On the basis of the lack of evidence supplied by the Tenant, the Tribunal considers that no undue hardship would be caused and accordingly leaves the starting date for the new rent at 07 March 2026. Decision 16. Therefore, the Tribunal determines the market rent at £377.53 per fortnight with effect from 07 March 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 tenant's improvements to the property, such as a fitted kitchen and bathroom, were considered when adjusting the rent.
  • The Tribunal used its own expert knowledge of rental values in the area to determine a market rent.
  • The landlord's recent improvements to the property's structure, including a full re-roof, were noted.
  • The new rent was set to take effect from the date specified in the landlord's notice.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal determined the new market rent for an assured tenancy property in Bury.

Who was involved?

A tenant and a landlord were involved, with the tenant challenging the proposed rent increase.

How did the court decide, and why?

The tribunal reviewed evidence on local rental prices and adjustments made to the property. They determined a new market rent based on this assessment.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988 were applied in determining the market rent.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The tribunal considered local rental evidence and adjustments made to the property by both parties.

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

The decision was partially for the tenant, as it set a lower rent than proposed by the landlord.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone facing a rent increase can challenge it through a tribunal if they believe it is unfair or too high.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Local rental prices and property improvements were key pieces of evidence considered by the tribunal.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, either party may apply for permission to appeal on a point of law within 28 days.

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.