First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Shorthold Tenancy
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided on the rent for an assured shorthold tenancy in Wembley, ensuring it reflects current market values.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a rent level that reflects the open market value of the property.
📖 What the law says
Under this rule, a tenant with an assured tenancy can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent they are paying. However, the application cannot be made if the rent has already been determined by a previous decision 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). When determining the rent, the tribunal considers what a willing landlord would charge for the property in the open market, taking into account the same terms and conditions as the current tenancy.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal set the rent for an assured shorthold tenancy in Wembley.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured shorthold tenancy in Wembley, considering market conditions and the property's condition.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/0AE/MNR/2024/0506
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 85 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
[NAME]
Landlord [COMPANY]
[APPELLANT] [NAME]
1. The rent is: £ 1610 Per pcm
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 26 November 2024
*3. The amount included for services is negligible nil Per Calendar month
*4. Service charges are variable and are not included n/a
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 25 September 2021
6. Length of the term or rental period Calendar monthly periodic
7. Allocation of liability for repairs Per tenancy
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None
9. Description of premises Purpose Built 86m2 GIA flat on level 13 built c.2010 on a large modern high rise residential estate. 2 bedrooms, living room, kitchen bath/wc. The Landlord is not obliged but may charge a rent up to but, not in excess of the figure shown at box 1.
[NAME] of Decision 26 November 2024
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2013
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00AE/MNR/2024/0506 Property : 85 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant: [redacted] : None Respondent : [redacted] (Landlord) Representative : None Type of Application : Section 13(4) Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Members :
[NAME] and venue of Hearing : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of Decision : 26 November 2024
REASONS FOR DECISION
Background
1 The First Tier Tribunal received an application dated 26 July 2024 from the [APPELLANT] of the Property, regarding a notice of increase of rent served by the landlord, under S.13 of the Housing Act 1988 (the Act).
2 The notice, dated 26 June 2024, proposed a new rent of £1610 per calendar month, with effect from and including 25 August 2024. The passing rent was said to be £1471.25 pcm in the landlord’s Notice but £1375 pcm in the [APPELLANT]’s application form.
2 3 The tenancy is an assured shorthold periodic monthly tenancy. A copy of the last tenancy agreement was provided.
4 Directions were issued 4 October 2024. Neither party requested a hearing. The Tribunal does not routinely carry out inspections.
5 The Tribunal received an initial application. The Tribunal sent out its standard Reply Form to both landlord and [APPELLANT]. Neither returned it.
6 The Tribunal carefully considered and noted such representations as it received from both parties regarding the location layout size and condition of the Property and other available and let comparable properties in the location.
Property
7 The Property appears to be a modern apartment of some 86m2 located on the 13th floor of a post 2000 block of flats. The block is located in a relatively recent area of high rise development in Wembley. The block appeared to be of modern concrete and steel construction, clad in contemporary materials providing an attractive finish. There are lifts and stairs serving all levels.
8 The accommodation comprised 2 bedrooms, living room kitchen bathroom/wc. There were no outside areas let with the Property. No furniture in the Property was let to the [APPELLANT] with it. In most lettings by [NAME] floor finishes, curtains, blinds, etc are added by the tenants, with their white goods where they are not fitted, however no particular details were provided here, by either party.
9 The Tribunal had regard to Google Streetview in [ADDRESS] (data capture October 2022).
10 The Tribunal is grateful for such other information as was supplied by the parties. The [APPELLANT] also provided brief details of personal and family circumstances regarding his request for hardship, to be taken into account in setting the rent.
Law
11 In accordance with the terms of S14 of the Housing Act 1988 we are required to determine the rent at which we consider the property might reasonably be expected to let in the open market, by a willing landlord, under an assured tenancy, on the same terms as the actual tenancy; ignoring any increase in value attributable to [APPELLANT]’s improvements and any decrease in value due to the [APPELLANT]’s failure to comply with any terms of the tenancy. Thus the Property falls to be valued as it stands; but assuming that the Property to be in a reasonable internal decorative condition.
3 Decision
12 Based on the Tribunal’s own general knowledge of market rent levels in and around Wembley, it determines that the subject Property would let on a normal Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST) terms, for £1610 per calendar month, fully fitted and in good order. The market rent is therefore determined at £1610 pcm.
13 The [APPELLANT] made limited representations to the Tribunal on their expected hardship if the rent was to be increased as proposed but, gave few hard facts, details, figures or supporting information. The legislation allows the Tribunal a small degree of flexibility to reflect any hardship element from an increased rent. To this extent permitted the Tribunal determines that the effective start date for the new rent be delayed from the date in the Notice of 25 August 2024, to the date of this determination, 26 November 2024.
14 The new rent will take effect from and including 26 November 2024, and not the earlier effective start date given in the landlord’s Notice. As the Form of Determination dated 26 November 2024 states: The Landlord is not obliged but, may charge a rent up to but, not in excess of, the figure shown at box 1.
Name: [NAME]. [NAME]: 26 November 2024
Rights of appeal
By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, the tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may have.
If either party is dissatisfied with this decision, they may apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on any point of law arising from this Decision.
Prior to making such an appeal, an application must be made, in writing, to this Tribunal for permission to appeal. Any such application must be made within 28 days of the issue of this decision to the person making the application (regulation 52 (2) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rule 2013).
If the application is not made within the 28-day time limit, such application must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28 day time limit; the tribunal will then look at such
4 reason(s) and decide whether to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit.
The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the tribunal to which it relates (i.e., give the date, the property, and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party making the application is seeking.
If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy in Luton
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Rent at £775 for Assured Shorthold Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy - First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Fair Market Rent for Small Rural Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent for New Flat in High Wycombe
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Reduced Rent Adjustment Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy Set by First-tier Tribunal
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Fair Rent for Norwich Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Reduces Proposed Rent Increase for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent at £1000 pcm for Assured 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 market rent based on its general knowledge of rent levels in the area.
- The Tribunal considered the property to be a modern apartment of 86m2 on the 13th floor of a post-2000 block.
- The Tribunal delayed the effective start date of the new rent due to the tenant's representations of hardship.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
It set the rent for an assured shorthold tenancy in Wembley.
Who was involved?
A tenant and a landlord were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the market value of the property and its condition.
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 market value of the property.
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 consider market conditions when disputing rent.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence on the property's condition and market conditions mattered.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
Yes, it is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor.
