VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal sets £97.53 weekly rent for assured tenancy in Sheffield

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on the rent for an assured periodic tenancy. They set the weekly rent at £97.53, which includes service charges but excludes water rates and council tax.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a rent determination that reflects the actual costs and services provided, as seen in this case where the rent was set at £97.53 per week.

Topics

tenancyrent determination

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, a tenant can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under their assured tenancy, except if the rent is based on a previous determination or more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy. The tribunal will then decide the rent that a willing landlord would 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 the rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £97.53 per week, excluding certain charges but including service fees.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988, setting the weekly rent at £97.53 excluding water rates and council tax but including service charges of £13.57 per week.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. MAN/00CG/MNR/2020/0020

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 12 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Mr C Tonge LL B BA Mrs [RESPONDENT] [COMPANY] PO Box 2070, Preston, Lancashire, [POSTCODE]

Tenant Ms [APPELLANT] [NAME]

1. The rent is: £97.53 Per Week (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: Monday 6 April 2020

3. The amount included for services is £13.57 Per Week

4. Date assured tenancy commenced Monday 19 March 2012

5. Length of the term or rental period Weekly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs As per the tenancy agreement which is too long to recite here.

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord

8. Description of premises An upper floor flat in a purpose built block in a Housing Authority complex in the City Centre of Sheffield (within the inner ring road). Circa 1990’s, brick with tiled roof, off street parking, gardens front and rear, living room, kitchen, bathroom, 2 bedrooms. Extensive services provided without which tenancy would have been of little value.

Judge Mr C Tonge LL B BA Date of Decision 19 June 2020

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

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 £97.53 per week.
  • The decision on the rent determination took effect on Monday 6 April 2020.
  • The determined rent included an amount of £13.57 per week for services.
  • The property was described as an upper floor flat with two bedrooms, a living room, kitchen, and bathroom.
  • The tenancy included extensive services, which were considered essential to its value.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal set the weekly rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £97.53, excluding water rates and council tax but including service charges.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was over the fair rent for an assured periodic tenancy in a Housing Authority complex in Sheffield.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to set the rent at £97.53 per week, considering the fair rent principles under the Housing Act 1988, section 14.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988, section 14 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the application of fair rent principles under the Housing Act 1988, section 14.

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

The decision was for the tenant who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

For someone in a similar situation, they can seek a fair rent determination under the Housing Act 1988, section 14.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The judgment does not specify the evidence or documents that mattered.

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.