First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided on the rent for an assured periodic tenancy. They set the monthly rent at £790, excluding water rates and council tax. This decision applies to the property located at the address, Bacup.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to have their rent determined under section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.
📖 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 the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the rent based on what a willing landlord would charge in the open market for a similar property. The application can't be made if the rent is already set by a previous determination under this section or if more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal set the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988, setting the monthly rent at £790 excluding water rates and council tax.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First Tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. MAN/30UM/MNR/2025/0602 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 9 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Judge J [NAME] Landlord [APPELLANT]. [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] [NAME]
1. The rent is: 790.00 Per month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3 & 4)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 22/11/2025 3. The amount included for services is not applicable Per 4. Date assured tenancy commenced 22/11/2022 5. Rental period monthly 6. Allocation of liability for repairs Section 11, Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Nil – unfurnished.
8. Description of premises 3-bedroom semi-detached house with garden, in need of some improvement. Chairman J Stringer Date of Decision 15th April 2025
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
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 determined the rent for the property to be 790.00 per month.
- The tribunal's decision on the rent took effect on November 22, 2025.
- The property was described as a 3-bedroom semi-detached house with a garden.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal set the monthly rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £790.
Who was involved?
The decision involved a tenant and a landlord.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the Housing Act 1988, which provides the framework for determining rent for assured periodic tenancies.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988, specifically section 14, was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument centered around the application of the Housing Act 1988 to determine the appropriate rent.
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 refer to the Housing Act 1988 for guidance on rent determination.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence likely included details about the property and the current rental agreement.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions like this can be appealed to a higher court.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.