Market Rent Set for Assured Tenancy
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided on the market rent for an assured periodic tenancy, setting it at £2,200 per month. This decision was based on the Housing Act 1988 and took into account the condition of the a person and local rental prices.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988.
📖 What the law says
Under this section, a tenant can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under an assured tenancy. The tribunal will then determine a fair market rent based on what a willing landlord would charge for a similar property under similar conditions. The determination considers comparable properties and local conditions.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured periodic tenancy.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined a market rent of £2,200 per month for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988, considering comparable properties and local conditions.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – [NAME] Chamber File Ref No. LON/00BC/MNR/2025/0895
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 47 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Judge Tueje Mrs J Rodericks MRICS
Landlord [NAME] 69 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Tenant [NAME]
1. The rent is: £ 2,200 Per month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 15th July 2025
*3. The amount included for services is/is negligible/not applicable N/A Per
*4. Service charges are variable and are not included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 15th July 2017 6. Length of the term or rental period Monthly statutory periodic 7. Allocation of liability for repairs s.11 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None 9. Description of premises 2-bedroom house
Chairman Judge Tueje Date of Decision 8th December 2025
HMCTS Code : P: PAPERREMOTE (Paper, video, audio)
Case Reference
: LON/00BC/MNR/2025/0895
[NAME] : 47 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tenant
: [APPELLANT]
Landlord : [APPELLANT] [NAME] of [NAME] : Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988
Tribunal Member : Judge Tueje
Mrs J Rodericks MRICS
Date of reasons : 8th December 2025
_______________________________________________ DECISION The Tribunal determines a rent of £2,2oo per month with effect from 15th July 2025 ____________________________________ This determination contains the Tribunal’s decision, and its extended reasons for that decision EXTENDED REASONS
Background
1. These proceedings relate to a monthly statutory periodic assured tenancy, following expiry of a fixed term agreement commencing 15th July 2017 in respect of the [NAME] known as 47 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] (the “[NAME]”).
2. By a notice dated 10th June 2025 served under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988, the landlord proposed a new rent of £2,350 per month in place of the existing rent of £2,100 per month, to take effect from 15th July 2025.
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023 FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] CHAMBER ([NAME])
3. The rent does not include council tax and water charges
4. The statutory implied repairing obligations set out at section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 apply to the tenancy agreement.
5. By an [NAME] dated 14th July 2025, made 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. The tenant’s referral was received by the Tribunal on 14th July 2025.
6. By a directions order dated 9th October 2025 the landlord and tenant were required to submit a completed Reply Form and supply any supporting documentation by 30th October 2025 and 13th November 2025 respectively. The tenant submitted his information 4 days late and filed an Order 1 form dated 19th November 2025 requesting an extension. The landlord objected and submitted the tenant’s reply should be struck out.
7. By a letter dated 20th November 2025 the parties were notified that Judge O’Brien granted the tenant the extension sought and confirmed that in accordance with the parties stated positions, the [NAME] would be determined on the papers.
Inspection
8. The Tribunal did not inspect the [NAME]; both parties indicated on their Reply Forms that they did not require a hearing or inspection. Therefore, the determination was carried out on the papers on the basis of the documentary evidence provided by the parties.
9. The subject [NAME] is an unfurnished two-bedroom terraced house, comprising 1 living room, kitchen, 2 bedrooms, 1 bathroom, a shower room with a toilet, plus a rear garden.
10. [ADDRESS] shows the [NAME] on a busy road which is predominantly residential, although there are some commercial units at one end of the road.
The Tenant’s Evidence
11. The tenant’s Reply Form states the [NAME] has central heating and double glazing, and the landlord has supplied floor coverings, curtains and kitchen appliances (cooker, washing machine and fridge freezer). It also states there is no disrepair.
12. Ilford station is a 7-minute walk away.
13. No photographs of the [NAME], nor rents for comparable properties were provided.
The Landlord’s Evidence
14. The landlord describes the [NAME] as in a good condition throughout, and provided the following information regarding the [NAME]: 14.1 The living room forms part of a through lounge; 14.2 The kitchen is well maintained and has all essential appliances; 14.3 Bedroom is described as the master bedroom, and has fitted wardrobes; 14.4 Bedroom two is a double bedroom and has fitted wardrobes; 14.5 The bathroom has a modern appearance; 14.6 There is a downstairs shower room with a toilet; and 14.7 There is a sun room providing an additional living space.
15. The landlord’s description continues that the [NAME] is a 5-minute walk from Ilford station. There is a supermarket a 1-minute walk from the [NAME], and various shops are nearby on [ADDRESS], and two primary schools are also within a 5-minute walk.
16. The Tribunal also considered the landlord’s comparable evidence, namely a two-bedroom house on [ADDRESS], IG1 advertised at £2,300 per month. The landlord states the [NAME] has better transport connections, is closer to schools and shops, compared to the house at [ADDRESS].
17. The landlord also states that since the rent was last assessed by the Tribunal rental values have increased by 8.9%.
The Law
18. The rules governing a determination are set out in section 14 of the Housing Act 1988. In particular, the Tribunal is to determine the rent for at which the [NAME] might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy, subject to disregards in relation to the nature of the tenancy (i.e. it being granted to a “sitting tenant”) and any increase or reduction in the value due to the tenant’s improvements or failure to comply with the terms of the tenancy.
Determination and Valuation
19. Having considered the evidence provided by the parties, based on our own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, we consider that the open market rent for the [NAME] in good tenantable condition would be in the region of £2,200 per month.
20. The Tribunal has also checked [ADDRESS], which shows that [ADDRESS] is a pleasant and quiet residential cul-de-sac. That is compared to the [NAME] which, in relative terms, is on a busier road with some commercial properties at one end of the road. [ADDRESS] is also characterised by properties showing varying levels of maintenance, and an overall less amenable appearance compared to [ADDRESS].
Decision
21. The Tribunal therefore determined that the rent at which the subject [NAME] might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy was £2,200 per month.
22. The Tribunal received no evidence of hardship and therefore directs the new rent of £2,200 month to take effect on 15th July 2025, being the date specified in the landlord’s notice proposing a new rent. Name: Judge Tueje
Date: 8th December 2025
RIGHTS OF APPEAL By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) ([NAME] Chamber) Rules 2013, the Tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may 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 the case. The [NAME] should be made on Form RP PTA available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form- rp-pta-[NAME]-for-permission-to-appeal-a-decision-to-the-upper-tribunal- lands-chamber 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 [NAME] and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking. Please note that if you are seeking permission to appeal against a decision made by the Tribunal under the Rent Act 1977, the Housing Act 1988 or the Local Government and Housing Act 1989, this can only be on a point of law. If the First-tier 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) Market Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Market Rent Due to Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Fair Rent Based on Market Conditions and Disrepair
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment for Assured Tenancy: First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Due to Property Disrepair
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy - First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Market Rent for Refurbished Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
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 tenant disputes the landlord's proposed rent increase.
- The rent is adjusted based on the property's condition.
- The rent is set according to fair market values.
- The rent takes into account the property's state of repair.
- The rent is determined under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
It set the market rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £2,200 per month.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the Housing Act 1988, considering the condition of the property and local rental prices.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the comparison of the property's condition and local rental prices.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation might expect a fair market rent to be set based on the condition of the property and local rental prices.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence such as the condition of the property and comparable rental prices were important.
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?
It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent determinations.
