VadeLab
DismissedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Market Rent Determination for Nearly New Property

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tribunal decided on the market rent for a nearly new property in a development. They based their decision on actual rents achieved in similar properties, setting the rent at £2,400 per calendar month.

⚖️ Legal holding

The market rent for a property should be determined based on actual rents achieved in similar properties.

Topics

tenancy disputesmarket rent determination

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 a notice proposing an increase in rent, which can take effect at the start of a new period of the tenancy. The new period must begin at least two months after the notice is served, with some exceptions for assured agricultural occupancies.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the market rent for a nearly new property in a development.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined the market rent for a nearly new property in a development based on actual rents achieved in similar properties. The rent was set at £2,400 per calendar month.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Dismissed

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Case Reference

HAV/29UD/MNR/2025/0815

[ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant/Applicant Ms [COUNSEL]

Tenant’s Representative None

Landlord [COMPANY]

Landlord’s Address

Landlord’s [NAME] of Application 17th November 2025

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

Tribunal Members [NAME] – [NAME] of Decision 11th March 2026

Rent Determined £2,400 per calendar month

Date the new rent takes effect 1st February 2026

2

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

Background

1. On 14th November 2025, the Landlord’s Agent served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £2,425.00 per calendar month (“pcm”) in place of the existing rent of £2,275.00 pcm to take effect from 1st February 2026.

2. On 17h November 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 assured shorthold tenancy commenced on 1st February 2025 for a term of 12 months. 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. No additional charges.

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. None

Inspection/Hearing

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

3

The Property

9. The Property is a detached ‘Shamrock’ style house within a nearly new development of 98 residential properties all of which are owned and operated by the Landlord, offering the following accommodation:

Hall, cloakroom with WC, living room, kitchen/diner, utility room, 2 double bedrooms (one with ensuite shower room), single bedroom and bathroom with WC.

Outside: Parking space for 2 cars, gardens.

The Property benefits from heating from an electric air source heat pump, double glazing, free Broadband and a dedicated property manager for the whole development. The Energy Performance Rating is ‘B’.

The Property is situated approximately 1.5 miles east of the centre of Dartford, close to parkland, local amenities and excellent transport links.

Evidence

The Tenant.

10. The Tenant made the following comments:

a) In her application the Tenant states that the Notice may not comply with statutory requirements but does not explain why she thinks this to be the case. The Tribunal has not found any shortcomings in the Notice.

b) The Tenant did not provide any evidence of rents agreed for similar properties.

The Landlord

11. The following comments were made by the Landlord’s Agent:

a) The Agent states that at the time of writing there are 14 comparable homes on the site of which 11 are occupied.

b) The Agent had completed three new lettings on this house type between 1st September 2025 and 21st January 2026 at £2,400 pcm and completed one renewal tenancy agreement between 1st August 2025 and 21st January 2025 at £2,400.

4

c) The Agent also provided details of similar properties to rent available on Zoopla or Rightmove with asking rents between £2,440 and £3,500 per month.

d) In his statement of 21st January 2026 the Agent suggests that the proposed rent of £2,425 with effect from February 2026 is consistent with the anticipated open market rental of the property, taking into account projected rental growth into 2026.

Determination and Valuation

12. The Tribunal determines that there is no defect in the Notice of rent increase.

13. The Tribunal considers that there is a particular micro market for rental properties on this development. The homes are nearly new and energy efficient.

14. The only evidence provided of actual rents achieved are recent lettings and renewals arranged by the Agent all at a rent of £2,400 per month. The Tribunal will not assess a rent based on projected future increases in the market.

15. Relying on its own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, and the comparable evidence provided by the Parties, the Tribunal considers that the market rental of the subject property is £2,400 per month.

Market rent

£2,400 pcm

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 evidence of undue hardship was provided.

Decision

14. Therefore, the Tribunal determines the market rent at £2,400 per calendar month with effect from 1st February 2026.

APPEAL PROVISIONS

5

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 rent adjustment is based on actual rental values in similar properties.
  • Evidence of comparable properties' rental values supports the fair market rent.
  • Rent adjustments consider the current market conditions and the physical state of the property.
  • The rent is set based on current rental values, not projected future increases.
  • Landlords must provide evidence of actual rents achieved in similar properties.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The market rent for the property was set at £2,400 per calendar month.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on actual rents achieved in similar properties, not on projected future increases.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988 were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the evidence of actual rents achieved in similar properties.

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

The decision was against the tenant who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should gather evidence of actual rents achieved in similar properties.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence of actual rents achieved in similar properties mattered.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, the decision can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on any point of law arising from this decision.

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

It is always recommended to get advice from a qualified solicitor for a case like this.

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.