VadeLab
AllowedFirst-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. The rent was set at £1728.00 per month, excluding certain costs like water rates and council tax.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to have their rent set according to the Housing Act 1988 Section 14.

Topics

tenancy agreementrent determination

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988 Section 14, a tenant under an assured tenancy can 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 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 determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988 Section 14. The rent was set at £1728.00 per calendar month, excluding water rates and council tax but including service charges.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. JM/LON/00BE/MNR/2023/0163

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 Prof R [NAME]

Landlord [COMPANY] [ADDRESS], London, [POSTCODE]

Tenant Ms [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 1728.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 10 November 2022

*3. The amount included for services is not applicable

Per

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 09.05.2021

6. Length of the term or rental period Rental period of one month

7. Allocation of liability for repairs Section 11

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None.

9. Description of premises Three bedroom deck-access flat on third floor of a post-war purpose built block.

Chairman R Percival Date of Decision 31 July 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 tribunal set the rent for the property at £1728.00 per calendar month.
  • The tribunal's decision on the rent took effect on 10 November 2022.
  • The property is a three-bedroom deck-access flat on the third floor of a post-war purpose-built block.
  • The tenancy commenced on 9 May 2021 and had a rental period of one month.

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 £1728.00 per month.

Who was involved?

A tenant and a landlord were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the Housing Act 1988 Section 14, which outlines how rents should be determined.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 Section 14 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument centered around the application of the Housing Act 1988 Section 14 to determine the 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 can expect their rent to be determined according to the relevant section of the Housing Act.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence likely included details of the tenancy agreement and the property.

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 always recommended to seek 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.