VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Market Rent Adjustment for Tenancy Dispute

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tribunal decided on a market rent of £2,700 per quarter for a property after considering various factors such as the property's condition, features, and flood risk. The decision reflects adjustments based on the property's state and location.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a market rent adjustment based on the property's condition and features.

Topics

tenancy disputesmarket rent determinations

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.13

This section of the Housing Act 1988 applies to certain types of assured periodic tenancies, excluding those that are considered relevant low-cost tenancies. It allows landlords to serve notices proposing increases in rent, subject to specific timing requirements.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal adjusted the proposed market rent to account for various factors affecting the property's value.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined a market rent of £2,700 per quarter for a property, adjusting the proposed rent based on the property's condition, features, and location risks.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Case Reference

HAV/19UE/MNR/2025/0848

Property

Lower Farm Cottage, Manston, Sturminster Newton, Dorset, [POSTCODE]

Tenant

Mr [COUNSEL]

Tenant’s Representative

None

Landlord

[NAME] ([COMPANY]) [RESPONDENT]

c/o [RESPONDENT], Citygate, St James’ Boulevard, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, [POSTCODE]

Landlord’s Representative

Mr [COUNSEL] of Application

27 November 2025

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

Tribunal Members [NAME] – [NAME] [NAME] (Hons)

Date of Decision

25 February 2026

Rent Determined

£2,700.00 per Quarter

Date the new rent takes effect

25 March 2026

2

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

Background

1. On 27 November 2025, the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £2,800.00 per Quarter in place of the existing rent of £2,600.00 per Quarter to take effect from 25 March 2026.

2. On 14 December 2025 (albeit received 22 December 2025), under Section 13(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988, the Tenant referred the Landlord’s notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal for determination of a market rent.

3. The Tribunal has not been provided with a copy of the tenancy agreement, although it is understood the assured tenancy commenced in 2004. The rental period is understood to be quarterly.

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. The tenant has confirmed neither furniture nor any services are provided under the tenancy.

Liability for Council Tax

6. The tenant is responsible for the payment of Council Tax in respect of the Property. The rent determined is exclusive of Council Tax.

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

7. The Tribunal understands the tenant is required to keep the property in repair, fair wear and tear excepted.

Inspection/Hearing

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

3

The Property

9. The Property is a detached house (ground and first floors), offering the following accommodation:

Ground floor – entrance hall, reception room, dining room and kitchen. Stairs to the first floor… First floor – three bedrooms and one bathroom/WC.

Outside: garden, shed, garage and parking space.

The Property benefits from two open fireplaces.

The property is situated in a rural location approximately three miles to the east of Sturminster Newton, close to the river Stour. Sturminster Newton is to the north-west of Blandford Forum and to the south-west of Shaftesbury.

The Tribunal notes the property is in an area of a ‘medium risk’ chance of flooding from rivers or sea and correspondingly a ‘low risk’ chance of surface water flooding, on the Environment Agency Flood Risk Register.

Evidence

10. Both the landlord and the tenant have returned the Tribunal’s Reply forms.

The Tenant.

11. Mr [APPELLANT] has made the following comments:

a) Under ‘Features’ Mr [RESPONDENT] says the landlord has provided neither central heating, nor double glazing, nor carpets and curtains, nor the White Goods. Mr [NAME] goes on to say there is a garage and off- street parking.

b) Under ‘Improvements’ Mr [NAME] says ‘Kitchen, 2 Bathroom suites, windows: my Father installed electric and water in 1952.’ In his application Mr [NAME] says, ‘New bathroom, new windows, fireplace, kitchen…’.

c) Under ‘Disrepairs/Defects’ Mr [NAME] says ‘Parts of ceilings fallen down on landing and two bedrooms’ windows rotted, some damp, bathroom 20 years old, kitchen 40 years old.’ run constantly. Black mould present despite numerous treatments by the Tenant. In his

4

covering letter to the application Mr [APPELLANT] says the house now is not in a very good condition.

d) Under ‘Any Other Comments’ Mr [NAME] says the nearest railway station is eight miles away and there is a Bus service daily.

e) To conclude under ‘assessment of the rental value’ Mr [NAME] refers to other properties having central heating and double glazing and says the house is liable to flooding. Mr [NAME] has provided various photographs to show flooding in the neighbouring lanes and items of disrepair at the property.

12. Mr [NAME] has not provided any rental evidence to assist the Tribunal.

On behalf of the Landlord, Mr [RESPONDENT], [NAME] Manager at [RESPONDENT] has given submissions.

13. In his replies, Mr [RESPONDENT] says the landlord has provided two open fireplaces, there is no double glazing and the carpets and curtains have been provided by the tenant. Thereafter Mr [APPELLANT] says the landlord overhauled the roof in 2004 and a new septic tank and soakaway was installed in 2015.

14. Under ‘Disrepairs/Defects Mr [NAME] says the bathroom/WC is 10 years plus to a good condition and the kitchen is also 10 years plus, but to a basic condition.

15. Mr [NAME] assesses the market rent at £4,700 per Quarter (to equal £1,567 per calendar month), if it was completely modernised and newly refurbished. Mr [NAME] goes on to say he makes an adjustment of 40% to arrive at £2,820 per Quarter (to equal £940 per calendar month) for the property for the following: (1) lack of central heating and double glazing, (2) dated kitchen, (3) dated bathroom, (4) no white goods or carpets, and (5) general property condition.

16. The following comparable lettings with their particulars were provided by Mr [NAME] to support his assessment of the rental value. Mr [NAME] says that each of the comparable lettings is within one mile of the property.

a) [ADDRESS] Cottages, Sturminster Newton – a three- bedroom, semi-detached cottage, asking rent £1,200 per calendar month, unfurnished.

b) Bat Alley, Sturminster Newton – a three-bedroom, semi-detached cottage, asking rent £1,250 per calendar month, unfurnished.

5

c) Bramley Cottage, Sturminster Newton – a three-bedroom, semi- detached cottage, asking rent £1,250 per calendar month, unfurnished.

Determination and Valuation

17. The Tribunal considers the comparable lettings provided by Mr [NAME] to be relevant in this matter to determine the market rent. The range of market rents is from £1,200 per calendar month up to £1,250 per calendar month. Having determined his market rent of £4,700 per Quarter, Mr [NAME] has itemised the factors that make up his deduction of 40%, albeit he has not provided a breakdown for the same.

18. Relying on its own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, and the comparables provided by the Landlord, the Tribunal considers that the market rental of the subject Property modernised and in good order would be in the order of £1,200 per calendar month. This is the rent we would expect the property to let for in the open market if it was in the same general condition as the comparable properties including having white goods and curtains provided by the landlord.

19. From the information provided by the parties the Tribunal has concluded adjustments from the market rent are required to reflect the following: (a) there is no central heating, (b) there is no double glazing, (c) the landlord has not provided carpets and curtains, (d) the landlord has not provided the White Goods, (e) the kitchen is unmodernised, (f) the bathroom/WC is unmodernised, (g) there are items of disrepair, and (h) it is located in a ‘medium’ flood risk area.

20. The Tribunal’s rental valuation with adjustments is as follows:

Market rent

£1,200.00 pcm

Less a) No central heating

£50.00 b) No double glazing

£25.00 c) No carpets and curtains £50.00 d) No White Goods £45.00 e) An unmodernised kitchen £25.00 f) An unmodernised bathroom/WC £25.00 g) Items of disrepair £50.00

h) Flood risk area

£30.00 £300.00

Market rent

£900.00 pcm

£2,700 per Quarter

6

Undue hardship

12. Mr [NAME] has not given any submission to the Tribunal that the starting date the new rent specified in the Notice would cause him undue hardship.

13. As a result of our decision the rent will increase by £100 per Quarter. The date specified in the landlord’s notice is 25 March 2026.

Decision

14. Therefore, the Tribunal determines the market rent at £2,700 per Quarter with effect from 25 March 2026.

APPEAL PROVISIONS

If either party is dissatisfied with this decision, they may apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal ([NAME]) 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 property's lack of central heating justified a rent reduction.
  • The absence of double glazing in the property supported a lower rent.
  • The landlord not providing carpets and curtains led to a rent adjustment.
  • The unmodernised kitchen and bathroom resulted in a reduction in market rent.
  • The property's location in a medium flood risk area warranted a rent decrease.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The landlord's proposed market rent of £4,700 per Quarter was not accepted as the starting point.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal set the market rent at £2,700 per quarter for the property.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved in the dispute over the market rent.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the property's condition, features, and flood risk, adjusting the proposed rent accordingly.

Which laws or rules were applied?

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

What was the argument that mattered most?

The arguments regarding the property's condition and features were crucial in determining the market rent.

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

The decision was for the tenant, who sought an adjustment to the proposed rent.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should consider the condition and features of their property when disputing market rent.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence of the property's condition, features, and comparable rental values were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, either party can appeal the decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on a point of law.

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

It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving tenancy disputes.

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.