First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rental Rate for Manchester Flat
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal set a new monthly rent of £870 for a flat in Manchester after considering similar properties and electricity charges included by the landlord. The decision was made to avoid undue hardship for the tenant.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant's proposed new rent must be assessed against comparable rental values in the area, considering any utilities provided by the landlord.
📖 What the law says
This section of the Housing Act 1988 applies to certain types of assured periodic tenancies, allowing landlords to propose increases in rent under specific conditions. The notice proposing a new rent must specify a new period of the tenancy starting at least two months after the notice is served.
This section implies a covenant by the lessor to 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. It also includes the obligation to repair and maintain installations for space heating and heating water.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured shorthold tenancy based on comparables and adjusted for utilities provided by the landlord.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined a new market rent of £870 pcm for an assured shorthold tenancy, adjusting from the landlord's proposed rate based on comparable rental values and utilities provided.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed in Part
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
Case Reference
MAN/00BU/MNR/2025/0999
[ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tenant
[NAME]
Tenant’s Representative
Landlord
[COUNSEL]
Landlord’s Address
The Mill, Askham, Penrith CAlO 2PF
Landlord’s [COUNSEL] of Application
31 August 2025
Type of Application Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988
Tribunal Members [NAME] – [NAME] of Decision
16 June 2026
Rent Determined
£870.00 per calendar month
Date the new rent takes effect
11 May 2026
2
REASONS FOR THE DECISION
Background
1. On 30 July 2025, the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £870.00 per calendar month(pcm) (including electricity charges of £70) in place of the existing rent of £635.00 pcm (including electricity charges of £35) to take effect from 1 September 2025.
2. On 31 August 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 shorthold tenancy commenced on 1 March 2024 for a term of six months. The rental period is monthly.
Allocation of Repairs between Landlord and Tenant.
4. As per tenancy agreement and section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
Services Charges or furniture provided by Landlord (other than carpets and curtain and white goods specified below) and the costs relating to the same.
5. The rent includes electricity charges. The Property is let unfurnished.
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. N/A
Inspection/Hearing
3
8. Neither party requested an oral hearing. The Tribunal has considered this case on the basis of an inspection, the papers provided by the parties and its own knowledge and specialist expertise.
The Property
9. The Tribunal carried out an inspection of the Property on 11 May 2026 in the presence of the Tenant and the Landlord’s agent.
10. The Property is a ground floor flat within a converted building offering the following accommodation:
Open plan kitchen/lounge, bedroom, bathroom providing full suite.
Outside: communal garden and parking to rear – parking is on a first-come-first-served basis – basement storage.
The Property benefits from gas-fired central heating and is double glazed.
The Property is situated in the Old Trafford area of Manchester within close proximity of amenities. Manchester City Centre is approximately 1.5 miles to the north east.
Evidence
11. Both the Tenant and the Landlord provided written submissions.
The Tenant
12. The Tenant provide correspondence in which she accepted the electricity charges of £70 pcm but proposed a rent of £700 per month. The Tenant also mentioned that she had undertaken gardening works to the communal garden.
13. In terms of rental evidence, the Tenant did not provide any comparable evidence.
The Landlord
4
14. The Landlord for his part provided as comparables lettings of three other flats in the same building, two at £800 pcm and one at £780 pcm (all excluding utilities).
Determination and Valuation
15. The Tribunal attributed significant weight the comparables provided by the Landlord within the same building.
16. 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 in reasonable condition would be £800.00 pcm exclusive of utilities. 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. The Tribunal considers the Property to be in good condition.
17. From this level of rent, the Tribunal has made adjustments in relation to the following:
a) The provision of electricity by the Landlord.
The full valuation is shown below:
Starting Rent
£800.00 pcm Add a) Items given under a) above £70.00
Market rent
£870.00 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.
5
13. Shortly before the date of inspection, the Tenant enquired about the Tribunal’s ability to fix a later starting date in this case. As this was not an application as such, the Tribunal allowed further time for the Tenant to make an application, including any supporting evidence, for the start of the new rent to be delayed, following which the Landlord was allowed time to submit a response.
14. The Tenant’s application for a delayed start date is based on the fact that she is out of work and reliant upon Universal Credit, any increase in which will in all likelihood not be backdated.
15. The Landlord’s Representative contested the Tenant’s application, arguing that the new rent should commence from the date specified in the Notice of Increase, and noting that a delay would be a cause of hardship to the Landlord.
16. The Tribunal is mindful that the need for additional time to consider this matter was a result of the Tenant’s late application for a delayed starting date. Had the application been made in good time, we would have made our determination following our inspection on 11 May 2026.
17. As a result of our decision the rent will increase by £235 a month. The date specified in the Landlord’s Notice was 1 September 2025. On the basis of the evidence supplied by the Tenant, the Tribunal considers that for the increase to take effect from the date in the Landlord’s Notice would cause undue hardship and accordingly sets the starting date for the new rent as 11 May 2026.
Decision
18. Therefore, the Tribunal determines the market rent at £870.00 per calendar month with effect from 11 May 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
6
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:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent for Manchester Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Shorthold Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £1,250 PCM
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £900 pcm
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £725 PCM for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rental Rate for Tenant's Property
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 proposed rent was supported by comparable lettings of other flats in the same building.
- The Tribunal used its own expert knowledge of rental values in the area to determine the market rent.
- The property's good condition was a factor in determining the market rent.
- The provision of electricity by the landlord was added to the starting rent.
- The tenant's reliance on Universal Credit and being out of work justified delaying the new rent's start date.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord's argument that a delay in the new rent's start date would cause hardship was not accepted.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The First-tier Tribunal set a new market rent of £870 pcm for an assured shorthold tenancy.
Who was involved?
A tenant and landlord were involved in the dispute over rental rates.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on comparable rental values and adjustments for utilities provided by the landlord.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Housing Act 1988 s.13 and Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.11 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The comparables provided by the landlord within the same building were significant in determining the market rent.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was partially in favour of the tenant, as it delayed the start date to avoid undue hardship.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone facing a rental increase should gather comparable evidence and consider their financial circumstances.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Written submissions from both parties and inspection of the property were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, an appeal can be made to the Upper Tribunal on points of law within 28 days.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.
