VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal sets £550/month rent for assured periodic tenancy in Manchester

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal set the rent for a tenant's assured periodic tenancy at £550 per month. The decision was based on Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988, which allows tenants to challenge their rent if they believe it is unfair.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair determination of their rent under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.

Topics

rent determinationassured periodic tenancy

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant with an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent they pay. The tribunal will then decide a fair rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for renting the property in the open market. The decision considers the type of tenancy, its start date, and the terms of the existing tenancy, excluding certain factors like improvements made by the tenant.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal set the rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £550 per calendar month, excluding water rates and council tax.

📜 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 £550 per calendar month excluding water rates and council tax.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First Tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. MAN/00BT/MNR/2025/1033

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]

[NAME], Tribunal Judge [NAME], MRICS, Valuer Member

[RESPONDENT]

c/o [APPELLANT], 424 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Tenant [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £550.00 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: 10th October 2025

*3. The amount included for services is not applicable

Per

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date statutory periodic assured tenancy commenced

6. Rental period Calendar monthly

7. Allocation of liability for repairs

Section 11 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord

N/A

9. Description of premises First floor reasonably spacious flat at the rear of commercial premises on [ADDRESS], built around 1900, mainly brick and slate construction. Shared access with flat 1A via a metal staircase. The flat comprises lounge, kitchen and bathroom with bath, wash basin and w.c. It appears that the bathroom could potentially be accessed via the hallway in the shared entrance, but the route is blocked off following a break-in. Internal inspection was hampered by the large quantity of debris strewn ankle-deep across all floors. It was clear however that the flat generally would require improvement to achieve its maximum rent, apart from general redecoration the bathroom and kitchen areas were in need of refurbishment. Some mould was evident but how the flat is being occupied may be a contributory factor there. This is a central location, convenient for local shops, but lacks parking space and the entrance is somewhat grim.

MR22 [NAME] of Decision 23rd February 2026

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

Allowed10 cases
Allowed in Part1 case
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 determined the rent for the property to be £550.00 per calendar month.
  • The decision on the rent determination will take effect from October 10, 2025.
  • The property is a first-floor flat with shared access, comprising a lounge, kitchen, and bathroom.
  • The flat's bathroom and kitchen areas needed refurbishment to achieve maximum rent.
  • The location is central and convenient for local shops, but lacks parking.

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 £550 per month, excluding water rates and council tax.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was over the appropriate rent for an assured periodic tenancy, considering the condition and location of the property.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to set the rent at £550 per month, taking into account the condition and location of the property as described in the judgment.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988, section 14 was applied to determine the rent for the assured periodic tenancy.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the condition and location of the property, which influenced the determination of the rent.

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

The decision was for the person who brought the case, allowing the rent to be set at £550 per month.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation can expect their rent to be set based on the condition and location of their property, as per the Housing Act 1988.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The condition and location of the property as described in the judgment were the primary factors considered in determining the rent.

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.