Tribunal Sets £700/month Rent for Assured Tenancy in March Area
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal set the rent for a semi-detached bungalow at £700 per month after considering comparable properties and the condition of the home.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a fair rent based on comparable properties and the condition of the premises.
📖 What the law says
Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant with an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under their tenancy. The tribunal will then determine a fair rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal set a rent of £700 per month based on comparable properties and the property's condition.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined a fair rent of £700 per month for a semi-detached bungalow based on comparable properties and the property's condition.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
FIRST – TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
Case Reference : CAM/12UD/MNR/2019/0001
Property : 3, [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Landlord : [NAME]
Tenant : Ms A [APPELLANT] of Application : to determine a rent under the Housing Act 1988
Tribunal Members : [NAME] Valuer Member
Date of inspection : 7 March 2019
Date Decision Effective: 13 March 2019 _______________________________________________
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF REASONS ____________________________________
DECISION The Tribunal determined a rent of £700.00 per month
THE PREMISES: Semi-detached post-war bungalow of brick and tile, with gardens front and rear, but no drive or garage: on-road parking. UPVC double-glazing. Accommodation; hall, sitting room, good-sized kitchen with modern fitted units and breakfast bar, 2 double bedrooms, bathroom/WC with electric shower, and conservatory with low polycarbonate roof. Gas central heating. The Landlord has provided a built-in oven and hob, and carpets, but no curtains or furniture.
CONDITION: External: satisfactory. The meter cupboard door is in poor repair, but this would not be of significance to the rental value. Internal: satisfactory. Some evidence of minor condensation issues, and the Tenant said the recessed ceiling lights in the sitting room and kitchen ‘blow’ frequently, but neither of these are of significance to the rental value
TENANT’S IMPROVEMENTS: None of significance to rental value.
LOCATION Located in a cul-de-sac close to the centre of a large village with a shop, Post Office and petrol station, approximately 2 miles from the town of March, and with a regular bus service to Peterborough.
THE LAW APPLIED: Section 14 Housing Act 1988
OPEN MARKET RENT: The market evidence provided by the Landlord was for two-storey properties not bungalows, and the Tribunal did not consider that such properties were comparable with the subject property. Taking into account the evidence provided by the Tenant of market rents for comparable bungalows, and the Tribunal members’ knowledge and experience, decided at £700.00 per month for a similar property.
DECISION: The Tribunal therefore determined a rent of £700.00 per month for the subject property.
Judge Lancaster
Important Note: This is a summary of the Tribunal’s reasons for its decision. Should you require more detailed reasons, they can be supplied but only if a written request for such reasons is received by the Panel Office within 21 days from the receipt of this document. The papers will then be returned to the Chair for such detailed reasons to be prepared.
Caution: For the purpose of reaching a decision the Tribunal inspected the subject property. Such inspection is not a structural survey and only takes a few minutes. Any comments about the condition of the subject property in this Statement of Reasons are made as a result of casual observation rather than a detailed inspection. Please do not rely upon such comments as a guide to the structural condition of the subject property.
3
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 11 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal sets £1000/month rent for assured tenancy in Beckenham
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Rejects Landlord's Request for Increased Rent
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets £1653.75 Rent for Assured Tenancy in London
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Fair Rent for Ground-Floor Flat
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets £2,250/month Rent for Assured Tenancy in North London
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal sets £239.20/month rent for assured tenancy in Southhall
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets £720/Month Fair Rent for Assured Tenancy in Bristol
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 set the rent at £700.00 per month for the property.
- The tribunal considered the tenant's evidence of market rents for comparable bungalows.
- The tribunal used its members' knowledge and experience to determine the rent.
- The property's external and internal condition was deemed satisfactory, with minor issues not affecting rental value.
- The property's location in a cul-de-sac near a village centre with amenities and bus service was noted.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal set a monthly rent of £700 for an assured tenancy.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was over determining a fair rent for an assured tenancy based on comparable market rents and the property's condition.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to set the rent at £700 per month, taking into account the evidence of market rents for comparable properties and the condition of the property.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988 was applied to determine the fair rent.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the evidence of market rents for comparable properties and the condition of the property.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case, setting the rent at £700 per month.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may also have their rent set based on comparable market rents and the condition of their property.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence of market rents for comparable properties and the condition of the property mattered.