VadeLab
OtherFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on the rent for an assured periodic tenancy between a tenant and landlord under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988, setting it at £800 per month. The decision also clarified who is responsible for repairs and services.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to have their rent set by a tribunal under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988 when there is a dispute with the landlord over the amount.

Topics

tenancy disputesrent determination

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. However, an application cannot be made if the rent is based on a previous determination under this section or if more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy. Additionally, a tenant can also apply to challenge a new rent proposed in a notice under sections 13(2) or 13A(2). The tribunal will then determine the rent at which the property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988, setting it at £800 per month from April 2023. The decision addressed issues related to service charges and repair responsibilities.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Other

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. MAN/00BN/MNR/2023/0033

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 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Judge J White

Valuer J Elliott

Landlord [NAME] 158 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Mrs [APPELLANT] [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 800.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3 & 4)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 21 April 2023

3. The amount included for services is not applicable 0.00 Per

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 1 March 2018

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 Unfurnished. Landlord flooring and cooker. Tenant fridge and washing machine.

8. Description of premises Two bed third floor flat in purpose built flat circa 2000. Part of 3 block development with 72 flats. Double glazing and full central heating. Resident parking space. Dated kitchen and bathroom with broken drawer handles, minor condensation in bathroom. Note start from today due to hardship identified.

Chairman J White Date of Decision 21 April 2023

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

Allowed11 cases
Other1 case

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 disputes the landlord's proposed rent increase.
  • The tenant requests a rent determination under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.
  • The tenant asks for a rent confirmation under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.
  • The tenant seeks a register of rents under an assured periodic tenancy.
  • The tenant demands a rent setting by a tribunal under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The rent was set at £800 per month for an assured periodic tenancy.

Who was involved?

A tenant and a landlord were in dispute over the rental amount.

How did the court decide, and why?

The Tribunal applied Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988 to determine the rent based on evidence presented by both parties.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988 was used to set the rental amount.

What argument mattered most?

The tenant's claim that the proposed rent was too high and not justified by market conditions.

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

It is unclear without knowing which party requested the determination, but one party likely benefited from the set rent amount.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone can seek a tribunal to determine their rent if they and their landlord cannot agree on an amount.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence of market rental rates, property condition, and service charges were likely important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions from the First-tier Tribunal can often be appealed to the Upper Tribunal.

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.