First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
📌 In brief
In this case, the First-tier Tribunal set the rent for a tenant's assured periodic tenancy at £110 per week, including service charges. This decision reflects what might reasonably be expected in the open market based on factors such as location and property condition.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to have their rent assessed at a level that reflects what might reasonably be expected in the open market, considering factors such as location and property condition.
📖 What the law says
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. The tribunal will then determine the rent that a willing landlord might reasonably expect to receive for letting the property in the open market. This determination considers factors like the location and condition of the property.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on market value without comparable evidence from either party.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on market value, setting it at £110 per week including service charge. The decision was made without comparable evidence from either party.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – [NAME] No. BIR/41UF/MNR/2023/0068
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 141 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
[NAME] Mr [RESPONDENT]
Landlord [RESPONDENT] [ADDRESS], Birmingham, West Midlands, [POSTCODE]
Tenant Mr [APPELLANT]
1. The rent is: £110.00 Per Week (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 3 April 2023
3. The amount included for services is £6.42 Per Week
4. Service charges are variable and are not included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 12 September 20211 6. Length of the term or rental period weekly
7. Allocation of liability for repairs s.11 8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord none 9. Description of premises First floor one bedroom self contained flat.
[NAME] of Decision 12 September 2023
1
Case Reference : BIR/41UF/MNR/2023/0068
Property
: 141 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Applicant: [redacted]
Respondent: [redacted] : Appeal against a Notice proposing a new rent under an
Assured Periodic Tenancy under section 13(4) of the Housing
Act 1988
Tribunal Members : Mr [NAME].[NAME]. [NAME] B.Sc.(Est.Man.) FRICS
Mr [NAME]. [NAME] and Venue of : None. Determined on paper. Hearing
Date of Decision : 12 September 2023
____________________________________________________________
REASONS FOR DECISION
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023
FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
2
1 The rent is determined at £110 (One Hundred and Ten Pounds) per week from 3 April 2023.
REASONS
Introduction
2 The Applicant hold an Assured monthly tenancy that commenced 12 September 2011.
3 On 24 February 2023 the Respondent served notice of increase under section 13(2) of The Housing Act 1988 ('the Act') requesting a new rent of £97.36 per week including £6.42 per week service charge, in place of the previous rent of £90.31 per week including £5.32 per week service charge, to take effect on 3 April 2023.
4 On 22 March 2023 the Applicant applied for the rent to be determined by the First-tier Tribunal ([NAME]).
5 On 12 September 2023 the Tribunal determined the rent at £110.00 per week with effect from 3 April 2023.
6 On 18 September 2023 the Applicant requested reasons for the Tribunal’s decision.
The Law
7 Section 14 of The Housing Act 1988 states:
'(1) Where, under subsection (4)(a) of section 13 above, a tenant refers to a rent assessment committee a notice under subsection (2) of that section, the committee shall determine the rent at which, subject to subsections (2) and (4) below, the committee consider that the dwelling-house concerned might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy -
(a) which is a periodic tenancy having the same periods as those of the tenancy to
which the notice relates;
(b) which begins at the beginning of the new period specified in the notice;
(c) the terms of which (other than relating to the amount of the rent) are the same as
those of the tenancy to which the notice relates;...'
'(2) In making a determination under this section, there shall be disregarded -
(a) any effect on the rent attributable to the granting of a tenancy to a sitting tenant;
(b) any increase in the value of the dwelling-house attributable to a relevant
improvement carried out by a person who at the time it was carried out was the
tenant, if the improvement-
(i) was carried out otherwise than in pursuance of an obligation to the
immediate landlord ...
8 The jurisdiction of the Rent Assessment Committee was transferred to the First-tier Tribunal ([NAME]) on 1 July 2013.
3
Facts Found
9 The Tribunal issued Directions on 10 May 2023 inviting the parties to make any submissions they wished to make regarding the market rental value of the property with a timetable for action.
10 The Tribunal inspected the property on 12 September 2023 in the presence of the Applicant. The Respondent was unrepresented.
11 The property comprises a self-contained first floor flat in a modern purpose built, two storey house. It is in a convenient position about 1 mile from Wolverhampton city centre within easy reach of local facilities.
12 The property is part of a small modern housing development in a residential area.
13 The flat has a ground floor entrance lobby with stairs to the first floor with Landing, Living Room, Bedroom, Kitchen, Bathroom and Airing Cupboard. Space heating is provided by electric night storage heaters. The flat was let unfurnished and it is understood the Applicant Tenant provided the white goods. There is a communal parking area outside.
Submissions
Neither party requested a hearing.
14 The Applicant
The Applicant sent a copy of the Tenancy Agreement to the Tribunal but made no other Submissions and did not provide any comparable evidence.
15 The Respondent
The Respondent Landlord sent a letter to the Tribunal, copied to the Tenant, dated 15 May 2023, explaining that the rent had been increased in line with the Government's Policy Statement on Rent for Social Housing which limited any increase to 7% above the previous year's rent. The previous rent had been £90.94 including service charge of £5.32 and 7% increase made this £97.36 per week. No evidence was provided of the rents of comparable flats available to let or recently let in the local market.
Decision
16 In the absence of any comparable evidence from the parties, the Tribunal relied on its own experience of market rents in assessing the level that might be achieved if it were offered to let on the statutory basis with vacant possession, in other words, a market rent. In doing so, it considered the accommodation comprised in the tenancy which is well designed and in good repair, the benefits of the location and demand for flats in the area.
17 Having considered all relevant points, the Tribunal found the rent in accordance with the Act to be £110.00 per week including service charge of £6.42 per week.
18 The Tribunal acknowledges that this is more than the Respondent Landlord requested but the Tribunal's duty is to assess the rent on the statutory basis and is aware of the limit on increases imposed by the national Policy Statement which is specific to social housing landlords such as [RESPONDENT].
[NAME] B.Sc.(Est.Man.) FRICS
Chairman
4
Appeal
If either party is dissatisfied with this decision an application may be made to this Tribunal for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal, [NAME] (Residential Property) on a point of law only. Any such application must be received within 28 days after the decision and accompanying reasons have been sent to the parties (Rule 52 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rental Value at £775 Monthly
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Rent at £800 for Semi-Detached House
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent at £850 PCM for Assured 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) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy - First-tier Tribunal Decis…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Assessment for Supported Accommodation Unit
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment for Tenancy Dispute Decided by First-tier Tribunal
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent at £900 PCM for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination 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
- Rent should be set at a reasonable market rate under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.
- Fair determination of rent is required if the tenant challenges a proposed increase.
- Rent assessment must consider market conditions and services provided.
- Rent should reflect the open market value of similar properties in the locality, adjusted for condition.
- Rent should be based on the open market value of the property, adjusted for its condition and amenities.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The rent for an assured periodic tenancy was set at £110 per week including service charge.
Who was involved?
A tenant and a landlord were involved in the case.
How did the court decide, and why?
The Tribunal decided based on its own experience of market rents, considering factors like location and property condition.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Housing Act 1988 s.14 was applied to determine the rent.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The lack of comparable evidence from either party led the Tribunal to rely on its own assessment of market rents.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was in favour of the tenant, setting a higher rent than proposed by the landlord.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation might be able to argue for a market-based rent assessment if comparable evidence is lacking.
What evidence or documents mattered?
No specific evidence was provided, so the Tribunal relied on its own experience of market rents.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, an application may be made to the Upper Tribunal 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 always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for specific cases.
