VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Manchester Property: Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £1,100 PCM

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) decided on a fair market rent for a property in Manchester after reviewing evidence of comparable rental prices. The tenant argued against an increase from £1,000 to £1,200 per month and won with the new rent set at £1,100.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord's proposed rent increase must be supported by evidence of comparable rental values in the area.

Topics

tenancy disputesrent determination

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.13

This section of the Housing Act 1988 allows landlords to propose an increase in rent for assured periodic tenancies, provided they serve a notice in the prescribed form. The new rent must take effect at the beginning of a new period specified in the notice, which starts at least two months after the notice is served.

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.11

This section implies a covenant by the lessor to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the dwelling-house, including drains, gutters, and external pipes, as well as installations for water, gas, electricity, and sanitation. It also includes the obligation to maintain space heating and hot water installations in proper working order.

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

📖 Technical summary

Tribunal determined the market rent for a property in Manchester based on rental comparables and expert knowledge.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined the market rent for a property in Atherton, Manchester. The tenant challenged the landlord's proposed increase from £1,000 to £1,200 PCM based on rental comparables and expert knowledge. The tribunal set the new rent at £1,100 PCM effective January 3, 2026.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Case Reference

MAN/00BN/MNR/2026/0020

[ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenants

[COUNSEL] [NAME]

Tenant’s Representative

N/A

Landlord

[COUNSEL]

Landlord’s [NAME], 1 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Landlord’s Representative

N/A

Date of Application

2 January 2026

Type of Application Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988

Tribunal Members Judge S. Westby Mr J. Faulkner FRICS

Date of Decision

16 April 2026

Rent Determined

£1,100.00 per calendar month

Date the new rent takes effect

3 January 2026

2

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

Background

1. On 2 December 2025, the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,200.00 per calendar month (pcm) in place of the existing rent of £1,000.00 pcm to take effect from 3 January 2026.

2. On 2 January 2026, under Section 13(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988, the Tenants referred the Landlord’s notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal for determination of a market rent.

3. The assured tenancy commenced on 3 March 2022 for a term of 6 months. The tenancy is now a periodic tenancy. The rental period is monthly.

Allocation of Repairs between Landlord and Tenant.

4. As per section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

Services Charges or furniture provided by Landlord (other than carpets and curtain and white goods specified below) and the costs relating to the same.

5. Carpets/floor coverings and curtain/blinds and white goods together with one wardrobe are included in the rental.

Liability for Council Tax

6. The Tenants are responsible for the payment of Council Tax in respect of [NAME]. The rent determined is exclusive of Council Tax.

Any other terms of the tenancy taken into consideration in determining the rent.

7. The Tribunal did not consider that any other terms of the tenancy were required to be taken into consideration in determining the rent.

Inspection/Hearing

3

8. Neither party requested an oral hearing. The Tribunal has considered this case on the basis of an inspection, the papers provided by the parties and its own knowledge and specialist expertise.

[NAME]

9. The Tribunal carried out an inspection of [NAME] on 16 April 2026 in the presence of Mrs [RESPONDENT]. The Landlord was notified of the inspection but did not attend.

10. [NAME] is a two-storey semi-detached house built in the 1970s with gardens to the front and rear which have been block paved. There is a shared driveway to the side and parking for two cars to the front. The roof is double pitched, tile covered and the walls are of cavity brickwork. Windows are uPVC double glazed. The accommodation comprises:

Ground Floor: Entrance hall, living room, kitchen.

First Floor: 3 x bedrooms (2 x double and 1 x single), bathroom/w.c.

There is gas-fired central heating.

Evidence

The Tenants.

11. In terms of rental evidence, the Tenants provided an Excel spreadsheet of five properties (all with 3 bedrooms) in the Atherton area that had been listed for rent in September/October 2024 (four comparables) and March 2026 (one comparable) with rents ranging from £895 pcm (listed on 25 September 2024) to £1,000 pcm (listed on 3 March 2026).

The Landlord

12. The Landlord did not provide any submissions or any comparables.

Determination and Valuation

13. The Tribunal considers that only [NAME] listed on 3 March 2026 is a useful comparable. The remaining comparables are dated and of less relevance.

14. Relying on its own expert and general knowledge of rental values in the area, and the comparable provided by the Tenants, the Tribunal considers that the market

4

rental of the subject Property is £1,100 pcm. This is the rent we would expect [NAME] to let for in the open market.

15. The Tribunal does not consider that there are any adjustments to be made to this amount.

Undue hardship

12. The new rent takes effect from the date specified in the Landlord’s Notice of Increase unless that would cause undue hardship to the tenant. In cases of undue hardship, the Tribunal has a discretion to fix a later starting date up to the date a Tribunal makes its determination.

13. No submissions have been made by the Tenant claiming undue hardship.

Decision

14. Therefore, the Tribunal determines the market rent at £1,100.00 per calendar month with effect from 3 January 2026.

APPEAL PROVISIONS

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 statement of reasons (regulation 52 (2) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013) stating the grounds upon which it is intended to rely in the appeal.

📊 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 landlord must provide evidence of comparable rental values in the area.
  • The rent adjustment should consider the condition of the property.
  • The rent must reflect any contributions made by the tenant.
  • The tribunal sets the rent based on the market rate and property condition.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The tribunal decided on a fair market rent of £1,100 PCM for the property.

Who was involved?

A tenant and a landlord were involved in the dispute over rental prices.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court reviewed comparable rental prices and set the new rent based on market conditions.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Housing Act 1988 sections 13 and 14 were applied to determine the market rent.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The tenant's evidence of comparable rental prices in the area was crucial.

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

The decision was for the tenant, setting a lower rent than proposed by the landlord.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone facing a rental increase can challenge it if they provide evidence of fair market prices.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Rental comparables and expert knowledge on local rental values were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Either party may appeal the decision to the Upper Tribunal based on points of law.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is advisable to seek legal 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.