Market Rent Reduced Due to Property's Condition
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal reduced the rent of a property because it was in poor condition and needed modernisation. The Tribunal considered factors like disrepair and outdated facilities when setting the new rent.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a market rent adjustment based on the property's condition and lack of modernisation.
📖 What the law says
This section allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the open-market rent, considering various factors including the condition and terms of the tenancy.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal adjusted the market rent of a property to reflect its poor condition and lack of modernisation.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) reduced the market rent of a property from £265.00 to £258.71 per week, considering the property's poor condition and lack of modernisation. The Tribunal inspected the property and noted issues such as disrepair, lack of central heating, and inadequate electrical and plumbing installations.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. FR/LON/00AH/MNR/2024/0643
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 79 WATCOMBE ROAD LONDN [POSTCODE]
[COMPANY] [COMPANY]
[APPELLANT] [NAME]
1. The rent is: £ 258.71 Per WEEK (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 25th October 2025
*3. The amount included for services is/is
negligible/not applicable N/A Per
*4. Service charges are variable and are not included
Chairman [NAME] of Decision 7TH April 2025
5. Date assured tenancy commenced By way of succession in 2009
6. Length of the term or rental period WEEKLY
7. Allocation of liability for repairs LANDLORD REPAIRS
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord NONE
9. Description of premises A 3 BEDROOMED RESIDENTIAL DWELLING HOUSE
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
Case Reference : FR/LON/00AH/MNR/2024/0643
Hearing Type : No Hearing
Property : 79 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Applicant: [redacted] : In person
Respondent : [redacted] (Landlord)
Representative : In person
Date of Objection : 12 September 2024
Type of [NAME] : Referral in Respect of Market Rent Under Section 13 of the Housing Act 1988
Tribunal Members : [NAME]
[NAME] of Hearing : N/A
Date of Inspection : 31 March 2025
Date of Full Reasons : 7 April 2025
STATEMENT OF FULL REASONS ON AN [NAME] FOR DETERMINATION OF A MARKET RENT UNDER S. 13 AND 14 OF THE HOUSING ACT 1988.
2
REASONS
Background
1. On 1 August 2024 the landlord served a Notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 proposing an increase in the rent of the above property from the passing rent of £250.00 per week to £265.00 per week.
2. On 12th September 2024 the [APPELLANT] made an [NAME] to the Tribunal for the determination of a market rent.
3. By way of a letter dated 5 February 2025, the Tribunal issued directions. These required the landlord to provide details of evidence on which they wished to rely by way of reply by 26 February 2025. The [APPELLANT] was directed to do the same by 12 March 2025 and the landlord was given until 19 March 2025 for his response thereto.
4. The [APPELLANT] took the opportunity to make submissions.
5. In consideration of the Market rental value of the subject property, the Tribunal has taken into consideration all documentation before it, including various letters and the any reply forms returned by the parties.
6. In the [APPELLANT]’s Reply form the [APPELLANT] states that they would like to have an inspection of the property undertaken by the Tribunal, but they do not require a hearing.
7. The [APPELLANT] provides details of the accommodation of the property, plus measurements, and details the accommodation as 2 living rooms, 3 bedrooms, kitchen and bathroom. The [APPELLANT] states that the property does not have central heating and details disrepair to the exterior fencing, evidence of damp beneath the decoration falling plaster and a general lack of modernisation.
8. They state that they have improved the property by way of fixing a step.
9. No submissions or reply form were received from the Landlord.
10. On 31 March 2025, on the basis of paper submissions and without a hearing, the Tribunal determined the Market rent of the above property at £258.71 per week.
3
Hardship 11. The Tribunal received no submissions on hardship.
Inspection
12. The Tribunal attended the property to undertake an inspection on 31 March 2025.
13. It was apparent that the property was originally constructed as a single residential dwellinghouse.
14. The accommodation comprises:
Ground floor: 2 reception rooms, a kitchen and bathroom/WC.
First floor: 3 bedrooms.
Externally: Gardens front and rear with no garage or parking space.
15. During the inspection, the [APPELLANT] was present, but the landlord did not attend.
16. On arrival the Tribunal notified the parties that they should be provided with access to all possible areas of the property but that she could not provide any additional evidence nor engage in conversation about the property nor the rental value thereof.
17. All rooms were accessible.
18. During the course of the inspection, it was apparent that the property has had little modernisation or maintenance for a good number of years.
19. The property requires thoroughly upgrading, decorating and modernisation to bring it to a standard average for a house let on the current market by way of an assured shorthold tenancy.
20. In addition to the above, the Tribunal made note of the fact that the kitchen and bathroom are fairly small, but that the bathroom and WC are only accessible through the kitchen, into an extension constructed at the rear. This is less attractive than a first floor bathroom, a matter that the Tribunal has taken into account in assessing the open market rental value of the property before other deductions.
4
The Law
21. When determining a market rent in accordance with the Housing Act 1988 Section 13 regard must be had to all of the circumstances (other than personal circumstances) including the age, location and state of repair of the property, matters contained within the rent, repairing obligations, etc. This means that issues such as the [APPELLANT]’s ability to pay the rent or bills associated with the property are not a consideration for the tribunal in assessing the rent.
Valuation
22. Following consideration of the written and photographic submissions given by both parties and taking into account the Tribunal’s inspection and using its own knowledge and experience of the rental market in South Norwood, the Tribunal finds that the market rental value of the property, if it was in good condition, would be £507.58 per week.
23. Taking into account the lack of modernisation and the general disrepair, the Tribunal considers it necessary to adjust that market rental value to reflect specifically the following:
i) There is no central heating within the property. ii) There is inadequate electrical installation by modern standards. iii) The kitchen is inadequate by modern standards. iv) The bathroom is inadequate by modern standards. v) There is extensive evidence of penetrating damp and rot and defective plaster throughout the property.
24. The property is in dire need of decoration internally and externally and carpets and curtains are now at the point where they require replacement.
25. Taking these and other more general factors into consideration, the Tribunal finds that it is necessary to make a 49% deduction in the market rental value of the property to reflect its condition and lack of modernisation.
5
Valuation Calculation
26. Open market rent £ 507.58 per month
Deduction for adjustments detailed above 49% = £ 248.87 per month
Adjusted rent £ 258.71 per month
The Tribunal therefore determines that the market rental value of the property should be set at a figure of £258.71 per week.
Hardship
27. No submissions on hardship were received.
Chairman:
[NAME] Chairman
Date:
7 April 2025
6
ANNEX OF RIGHTS FOR MARKET RENTS
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 might have.
If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), then a written [NAME] for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with this case
The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office within 28 days after the Tribunal sends written reasons for the Decision to the [NAME].
If the [NAME] is not made within the 28 day time limit, such [NAME] 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 reason(s) and decide whether to allow the [NAME] for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit.
The [NAME] 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 [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking. Any appeal in respect of the Housing Act 1988 should be on a point of law.
If the Tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further [NAME] 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) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Market Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Adjusts Market Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Market Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Market Rent for Tenancy Dispute
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Determines Market Rent for Deteriorated Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Market Rent Adjustment for Tenancy Dispute - First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Adjusts Market Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for London Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Market Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Reduced Rent Due to Property Disrepair
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Reduced Rent Due to Property Disrepair
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 is in a state of disrepair.
- The property lacks modernisation.
- The market rent is adjusted based on the property's condition.
- The property's condition justifies a reduction in rent.
- The property's lack of modernisation affects its market value.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal decided to reduce the market rent of a property from £265.00 to £258.71 per week.
Who was involved?
The tenant applied to the Tribunal for a reduction in rent, and the landlord was the respondent.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the property's condition and lack of modernisation, inspecting the property and noting several issues.
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 argument that mattered most was the property's poor condition and lack of modernisation.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case, the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation might also be able to get their rent reduced if their property is in poor condition.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence included the property inspection report and the tenant's submission regarding the property's condition.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
Yes, it is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent adjustments.
